Ethics in a Technological Culture

A Proposal for a Pragmatist Approach
  • Jozef Keulartz
  • Michiel Korthals
  • Maartje Schermer
  • Tsjalling Swierstra
Part of the The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics book series (LEAF, volume 3)


The Communist Manifesto (1848) could be read as a preamble to our present technological culture. In it, Marx and Engels conclude, with scarcely concealed admiration, that during its short period of domination, the bourgeoisie has brought together productive forces on a vaster, more massive scale than all of the previous generations combined. As a result, society has taken on an extremely dynamic character. “All fixed, fast frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real condition of life and his relations with his kind” (Marx and Engels, 1969). Elsewhere, in The Poverty of Philosophy (1847), Marx summarized his view of the relationship between technology and society concisely with the following words: “The hand-mill gives you society with the feudal lord; the steam-mill, society with the industrial capitalist” (Marx, 1982: 109).


Brain Death Future Scenario Moral Problem Technological Culture Technological Artifact 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Borgmann, A. (1984). Technology and the character of contemporary life. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Caspary, W.R. (2000). Dewey on democracy. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. De Beaufort, I. (1998). “Als twee druppels water? Van Fuchsia via Dolly naar Elvis? Het kloneren vanmensen nader bekeken”, in: H. Bout (red.), Allemaal klonen. Feiten, meningen en vragen overkloneren. Amsterdam and Den Haag: Boom/Rathenau Instituut, p. 91-119.Google Scholar
  4. Den Hartogh, G. (1997). “The values of life”, in: Bioethics 11(1): 43-66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. De Vries, G. (1999). Zeppelins; over filosofie, technologie en cultuur. Amsterdam: Van Gennep. Dewey, J. (1954). The later works. Athens: Swallow Press Books.Google Scholar
  6. Dickstein, M. (ed.) (1998). The revival of pragmatism. New essays on social thought, law, and culture. Durham and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dupuis, H.M. (1998). Op het scherp van de snede. Uitgeverij Balans.Google Scholar
  8. Dworkin, R. (1999). “Playing god”, in: Prospect Magazine (may).Google Scholar
  9. Giacomini, M. (1998). “A change of heart and a change of mind? Technology and the redefmition of death in 1968”, in: Social Science and Medicine 44(10): 1465-82.Google Scholar
  10. Harbers, H. and S. Koenis (1991). “De bindkracht der dingen”, in: K&M, tjdschrift voor empirische filosofie 23(1): 3-10.Google Scholar
  11. Horstman, K., G. de Vries and O. Haveman (1999). Gezondheidspolitiek in een risicocultuur. Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.Google Scholar
  12. Hickman, L.A. (1990). John Dewey's pragmatic technology. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Joas, H. (1993). Pragmatism and social theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Joas, H. (1996). The creativity of action. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  14. Ketting, E. (2000). “De invloed van orale anticonceptie op de maatschappij”, in: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor geneeskunde 144(6): 283-286.Google Scholar
  15. Klaver, I., Keulartz, J., H. van den Belt, B. Gremmen (2002). “Born to be wild: A pluralist ethics concerning introduced large herbivores in the Netherlands”, in: Environmental Ethics 24(1): 3-21.Google Scholar
  16. Latour, B. (1993). La clef de Berlin. Paris: Editions La Découverte.Google Scholar
  17. Marx, K. (1982). The poverty of philosophy. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Marx, K. and F. Engels (1969). Selected works,Vol. L Moscow: Progress Publishers, p. 98-137. Nussbaum, M.C. and C.R. Sunstein (eds.) (1998). Clones and clones. Facts and fantasies about human cloning. New York and London: Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  19. Oudshoorn, N. (1995). “Technologie en zorg: vrienden en vijanden. Het voorbeeld van nieuwe anticonceptiemiddelen voor vrouwen en mannen”, in: Gezondheid 3(3): 278-289.Google Scholar
  20. Putnam, H. (1994). Words and life. Cambridge: Havard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Rorty, R. (1996). “Response to Simon Critchley”, in: C. Mouffe (ed.). Deconstruction and pragmatism . London and New York: Routledge, p. 41-47.Google Scholar
  22. Stuhr, J.J. (ed.) (2000). Pragmatism and classical American philosophy. Essential readings and interpretive essays (second edition). New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press. Swierstra, T. (2000). Kloneren in de polder . Den Haag: Rathenau Instituut.Google Scholar
  23. Van der Burg, W. (1991). “The slippery slope argument”, in: Ethics 102: 42-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Vink, M. (1967). “Medisch-ethische problemen rond de niertransplantatie”, in: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 111(28): 1248-52.Google Scholar
  25. Walters, L. (1979). “Human in vitro fertilization: a review of the ethical literature”, in: The Hastings Center Report 23-43.Google Scholar
  26. Widdershoven, G. and M. Verkerk (1995). “Technologie en zorg”, in: Gezondheid 3(3): 250-253.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jozef Keulartz
  • Michiel Korthals
  • Maartje Schermer
  • Tsjalling Swierstra

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations