風險社會整體社會責任倫理底探討

Abstract

對貝克而言，晚期現代具有制度化風險在自身當中，整個社會就是一個風險的實驗室。隨著科技的能力增長；不可計算的後果與風險也隨之增長。在新興的科技中，特別是生物科技都再再挑戰著啟蒙的前提：科學的中立、與倫理上應然不可能源自於實然的概念。 因此，可以想見在風險社會中，科學失去了它自我合法化的基準。因此許多不同的聲音也參與進來；社會運動結合溝通理性取代了原本科學理性的位置。然而，問題是；這些新興社會運動是否真的能夠為整體風險社會之政治與倫理的爭議解決提供橋接的基礎。優納斯認為我們正面臨總體層次上倫理真空的問題，我們需要能處理此科技問題的責任倫理。這是過去的倫理從未觸及的，這種共同的責任倫理關切全球的人類生存以及未來世代，甚至是自然的存在本身。在這篇論文中探討優納斯的責任倫理，並以此為基礎進一步發展風險社會中整體社會底責任倫理。

According to Ulrich Beck, late modernity has institutionalized risks in itself. Along with the growing capacity technology grows the incalculability of the consequences. The technology, especially biotechnology, has challenged the premises of Enlightenment: the neutrality of science and the ethical idea that ‘ought to’ cannot be derived from’ is’. In risk society, science has lost a considerable degree of its own self-legitimation; many voices are involved in this process, new social action encroach scientific rationality, merging with communicative reason. The question is whether the new social movements are really capable of providing the basis of bridging ethics and politics. However, Hans Jonas argued that there is a vacuum in macro ethics today, and we need a new ethic of responsibility capable of addressing technology. No previous ethics had to consider the global condition of human life and the future generations, even the existence of nature itself. Therefore, this essay is based on Hans Jonas’s idea of the imperative of responsibility and tries to develop the idea of societal responsibility in risk society.