=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3069/preface
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3069/preface.pdf
|volume=Vol-3069
}}
==None==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3069/preface.pdf
Preface
Jani Koskinen1[0000-0001-8325-9277], Minna M. Rantanen[0000-0001-8832-5616], Anne-Marie
Tuikka1[0000-0002-2962-105X] and Sari Knaapi-Junnila1,2[0000-0003-4443-1550]
1
University of Turku, Turku, Finland
2
Tampere University, Tampere, Finland
jasiko@utu.fi
Conference on Technology Ethics is an event that the Future Ethics research group have
organised to promote both technology ethics research and networking. This year was
once again different than any before. Whilst the last one was fully virtual, and one
before that was physical, this was the hybrid one. This new normal – or should we say
established abnormal – sets demands for our communication. It has been noted that
communication that lacks the real encounter with people increases the risks of
unconstructive and disrespectful behaviour as people can distance themselves from
others(Zych et al. 2021). Likewise, people tend to divide people into groups such as us
and them. The problem is that those other groups are in many cases seen either lesser
than us, or on the other hand, seen as new and fresh, and thus better than us– just
because they are different and thus fascinating. The cause of these problems is that we
as people tend to judge others on a very thin basis while digital communication
amplifies this tendency.
As Charles Ess in his keynote well portrays, there is, for instance,. need for common
ground, avoidance of misinterpretations, respect instead of insulting, and courage to
meet people with different backgrounds (Ess 2021). Habermas and his system–
lifeworld model of society is a portraying model when thinking about the changes
technology brings to us. In the model, lifeworld is a description of the world where
people encounters and communication occur. This world is observed from the
perspective of people and their lives. The other side of the model is the systemic
"world", which refers to economic systems, political systems, and administrative
systems, where actions serve the institutionalised goals of systems. (Habermas,
1984;1987;1996.) Information technology is systemic as it is based on technological
artefacts and systems. In those systems, the institutionalised rules are embedded.
However, technology is used by people, and it is colonising the lifeworld. Our
communication is turned online, we are meeting people virtually, and technology is
twined as an integral part of living. The problem is not that we use technology, but
instead that it may colonise our lifeworld. It might replace something invaluable, such
as time from our families and friends, rest that we need, and free time by ourselves to
find what matters to us. We should find ways to use technology so that it helps our
lifeworld to flourish.
Fortunately, technology can help us and increase our possibilities in our world. We
just need to focus on how we use technology ethically. We need guidance for that which
remains the importance of Codes of Ethics. Don Gotterbarn (2021) presented this issue
in his special session, where he underlined that we need time. Likewise, we need
individuals and groups that defend the rights of the people like Keynote Leena
Romppainen, whose presentation gave us an overview of Electronic Frontier Finland,
a registered association that focuses on defending the digital rights of people
(Romppainen 2021). We need people to be interested in making the world a better
place. We need academics, citizens, people from business and especially you as it is
mind of the people where (and only where) the moral decision can be made. This is
where this conference wants to contribute–helping people to consider ethics and
technology. It cannot be outsourced.
References
Ess, C. (2021) "Can we talk?" Field notes and suggestions for interdisciplinary dialogues, ethics,
and citizen engagement. Keynote Speech at Confrence of Techonology ethics 2021 –
Tethics2021, 21.10.2021, Turku, Finland.
Gotterbarn, D. Presentation of ethical decision frameworks using the IFIP Code of Ethics,
Special session at Confrence of Techonology ethics 2021 – Tethics2021, 22.10.2021,
Turku, Finland.
Habermas, J. (1996) Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and
democracy, Polity press.
Habermas, J. (1984) The theory of communicative action, Vol. 1, Polity Press.
Habermas, J. (1987) The Theory of Communicative Action: Lifeworld and Systems, a Critique of
Functionalist Reason, Volume 2,Polity Press.
Romppainen, L. (2021) Electronic Frontier Finland: 20 years of digital rights in Finland −
Moments of despair and triumph. Keynote Speech at Confrence of Techonology ethics
2021 – Tethics2021, 22.10.2021, Turku, Finland.
Zych, I., Kaakinen, M., Savolainen, I., Sirola, A., Paek, H.-J., & Oksanen, A. (2021). The role of
impulsivity, social relations online and offline, and compulsive Internet use in
cyberaggression: A four-country study. New Media & Society.
https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211009459
Organising Committee
Jani Koskinen (Conference Chair)
University of Turku
Turku, Finland
E-mail: jasiko@utu.fi
David Krepps (Conference Co-Chair)
david.kreps@nuigalway.ie
National University of Ireland Galway
Galway, Ireland
Minna M. Rantanen (Program Chair)
University of Turku
Turku, Finland
E-mail: minna.m.rantanen@utu.fi
Anne-Marie Tuikka (Organising Chair)
University of Turku
Turku, Finland
E-mail: anne-marie.tuikka@utu.fi
Sari Knaapi-Junnila (Communication Chair)
University of Turku
Turku, Finland
E-mail: sari.knaapi-junnila@utu.fi &
Tampere University
Tampere, Finland
E-mail: sari.knaapi-junnila@tuni.fi
Program Committee
Antti Hakkala
Eva Collanus
Juhani Naskali
Juho Vaiste
Kai Kimppa
Marketta Niemelä
Mikko Vermanen
Otto Sahlgren
Salla Ponkala
Sami Hyrynsalmi
Sonja Hyrynsalmi