Abstract
Embedding ethics in technology involves considering not only the practicality of technological design but also integrating ethical attributes into the design process to ensure the ethical acceptability of technological applications. The proposal of this approach is based on a profound theoretical background, including Bruno Latour's ‘society of artifacts’ theory, Don Ihde's ‘technological mediation’ theory, Peter-Paul Verbeek's ‘materializing morality’ theory, and the ancient Chinese concept of ‘governing techniques with Dao’. It is also grounded in urgent practical needs: the design turn in the ethics of technology, the ethical turn in design practice and the value alignment of artificial intelligence all play a promotional role in the proposal of this approach. The essence of this approach is converting ethical values into design specifications, which achieves a translation from values to facts, implicitly entailing the inverse of the ‘Hume problem’. There are different approaches to embedding ethics in technology, including the ‘brain-based’ Western approach and the ‘heart-based’ Chinese approach. It is necessary to compare these two approaches and promote ‘heart–brain collaboration’ by leveraging the strengths of each perspective, thereby better realizing the goal of embedding ethics in technology.
Design, which reflects the initiative of human beings as practical subjects and their ability to plan and coordinate, is a crucial component of modern engineering and social management activities. Poorly conceived technological designs can have various negative impacts, harming society and the natural environment. Therefore, designers’ works must meet public expectations and comply with ethical norms, making it necessary to embed ethics in technological designs. With the rise of modern design concepts such as value-sensitive design (VSD), materializing morality, and responsible research and innovation (RRI), the approach of embedding ethics in design has been successfully executed in contemporary design practices. Compared to the West, ancient China developed a distinct set of methodological design principles, such as ‘embedding rituals in artifacts’, ‘governing techniques with Dao (principles)’, and ‘integrating Chan Buddhism into craftsmanship’. The concept of ‘heart–brain collaborative design’ proposed in this paper, which integrates Chinese and Western cultural characteristics, offers a new approach for embedding ethics in technology.
The theoretical foundation of embedding ethics in technology
Bruno Latour's ‘society of artifacts’ theory, Don Ihde's ‘technological mediation’ theory, Peter-Paul Verbeek's ‘materializing morality’ theory and the philosophy of technology with Chinese cultural features provide the theoretical foundation for embedding ethics in technology.
Bruno Latour's ‘society of artifacts’ theory
Latour's ‘society of artifacts’ concept has had a profound impact on the development of Western philosophy of technology. According to Latour, artifacts are like the ‘missing masses’ of human society, affecting human behavior in ways that sociologists and ethicists have largely overlooked. Just as the electromagnetic waves that humans can perceive represent only a limited frequency range of visible light in the form of colors, shapes and spatial dimensions, most electromagnetic waves affect human bodies and social activities without people's knowing (Latour, 1992: 225). In traditional studies of sociology and ethics, artifacts are treated as ‘missing masses’. The current task for these fields is to explore how artifacts influence and change human behavior and to use the design of artifacts to harness and control those ‘missing masses’. Latour's theory underscores the role of artifacts in shaping human behavior, manifested as changes in human cognitive patterns and decision-making (Latour, 1992: 258). This idea successfully brings ‘objects’ into the realm of sociology and ethics, arguing that artifacts possess ethical intentionality similar to that of humans. By designing and transforming artifacts, humans can turn them into ethical agents, delegating specific ethical values to them to help regulate human behavior. This is akin to pre-programming morality in the form of a movie script, constructing the scenes for enacting the script through specific technological design methods, and leveraging the moral functions of artifacts to ensure that technology is developed for good.
Building on his ‘society of artifacts’ theory, Latour proposes that both humans and non-humans are part of the actor-network, which re-examines the relationship between artifacts and humans and incorporates technological artifacts into the category of non-human actors. This new idea led to greater attention being paid to the social value of ‘objects’. In particular, it pointed out the role of artificial objects in influencing human behavior, thus opening the prelude to the embedding of ethics in technology.
Don Ihde's ‘technological mediation’ theory
American philosopher of technology Don Ihde explores the relationships between humans and technology from a phenomenological perspective, focusing on changes in human experience and perception. He establishes the role of technological artifacts in mediating the relations between humans and the world and identifies four basic types of human–technology relationships: embodiment, hermeneutics, background and alterity.
Embodiment relations represent the close connection between humans and technology, emphasizing that technology is not merely an external tool but an extension of human cognition and action. The theory of embodiment relations posits that, through its integration into daily life, technology alters human perceptions, ways of thinking and behavioral patterns, merging seamlessly with the body. This relationship transcends the traditional subject–object dichotomy and views technology as an integral part of the body (Cao, 2013: 24–25).
Hermeneutic relations reflect the extension of humans’ language and interpretive capabilities. In the relationships between humans and the world, a third party is needed to deconstruct the opacity between them, which is exactly the role played by technological artifacts. Unlike direct human senses, technological artifacts interpret the state of the world in an intermediary manner (Chen and Cao, 2004). In the design of visual communication, textual information and wayfinding patterns both rely on technological artifacts to acquire a truthful and effective understanding of the world. This makes hermeneutic relations a focal point of conflict in design ethics, raising the question of how we can explain the world's existence through the technological artifacts that effectively perceive it.
Background relations involve the process from the pre-setting to the realization of technology, creating an interactive state between technology and the environment (Yang, 2015: 36–37). Background relations do not imply that technology is entirely disconnected from humans, but rather that it operates behind the scenes. Under adaptive conditions, it may transform into other types of relations.
Alterity relations refer to human–technology relationships in which technology exists independently as an ‘other’. When interacting with humans, technology can express its self-adaptability through its ‘otherness’. Alterity relations not only provide the ethical intentions and application possibilities of high-tech artifacts in their future development but also enable technology to function as an independent regulatory system, acting as an ethical subject or agent (Yang, 2015: 38).
Ihde's ‘technical intermediary’ theory reveals the role of technology in regulating the relationship between humans and the world. If this role can be properly utilized, the positive ethical role of technology can be brought into play. Ihde's theory inspired Verbeek to propose the idea of ‘materializing morality’.
Peter-Paul Verbeek's ‘materializing morality’ theory
The concept of ‘materializing morality’ was initially proposed by Dutch philosopher of technology HJ Achterhuis and was later developed into a systematic theory by Peter-Paul Verbeek. This theory explores the ethical values of technological artifacts in the context of human–technology relationships, representing a more far-sighted ethical form for the design of technological artifacts. The idea of ‘materializing morality’ draws on Foucault's conceptualization of ethical substantiation within his framework of subjectivation processes, as well as Langdon Winner's theory of technological politics. The former advocates subjecting human ethical standards to technological rights and using technological artifacts to regulate people's daily moral behavior. The latter emphasizes the role of society in shaping technology and its products, thereby changing the way citizens exercise their rights (Verbeek, 2010: 41). The ‘materializing morality’ theory underscores that, taking feedback from users, designers empower technology to create technological artifacts, and then utilize the hermeneutic function and applicability experience of these artifacts to regulate the ethical relationship between humans and the artifacts, meeting people's needs for their ethical and functional attributes. The theory also holds that, while technology provides convenience for humans, it also changes their behavior and decision-making processes, which in turn shape technology, thus making technology and humans an inseparable unity (Liu, 2017).
The way that technology plays a regulatory role as an intermediary also reveals the intrinsic ethical dimension of technological design. This is because the human behavior that is being regulated occurs primarily in three forms: first, human agents who make ethical decisions or perform actions interact with and use technology in specific ways; second, designers, as the subjects of design, regulate technology through their designs or deliberate authorization; and third, technology itself, when acting as an agent, sometimes regulates human actions and decisions in unpredictable ways (Verbeek, 2010: 124).
Verbeek's ‘materializing morality’ theory has been instrumental in driving the ethical turn in technological design. It has had widespread influence in the field of the ethics of technology and has provided direct theoretical guidance for embedding ethics in technology.
The ancient Chinese concept of ‘governing techniques with Dao’
The philosophy of technology with Chinese cultural features is based on local cultural resources and can provide unique theoretical support for the integration of ethics into technology. In terms of understanding the essence of technology, unlike the West, which regards technology as a tool with which to conquer nature, Chinese culture tends to emphasize the overall harmony between technology and nature, society and human beings. This holistic thinking helps with considering ethical factors from a macro perspective in the process of technology research and development and application, and with incorporating ethical values throughout the entire life cycle of a technology. With the rapid advance of cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and big data, ethical issues such as algorithmic bias and data privacy leakage have gradually emerged in practice. These practical challenges have prompted researchers in the philosophy of technology to seek new ethical solutions from Chinese culture.
In the philosophy of technology with Chinese cultural features, ‘governing techniques with Dao’ is the dominant idea running through China's technological practice. In ancient times, skilled craftsmen were able to achieve a near-perfect natural state, even to the point of self-oblivion, during their technical activities. Fables such as ‘Cook Ding dissecting an ox’ (
The development of contemporary technology has given rise to new contradictions that human society has never encountered before, exposing the limitations of Western logical analysis. In this context, the study of the philosophy of technology with Chinese cultural features aims to provide a specific set of methods for observing and reflecting on technological design practices. It seeks to uncover the disharmonious relationships among the various elements involved in technological design activities and to explain how these relationships form, how they affect human social life and through what channels, and how they might be resolved. In this sense, the philosophy of technology with Chinese cultural features can be called a ‘harmonious view of technology’. Such research is not only especially significant for the contemporary study of ethics-embedded technology in China but is also of great value to the development of technological design for the whole of human society.
The practical background of embedding ethics in technology
The practical background of embedding ethics in technology has played a promotional role in the proposal of the approach. It includes the design turn in technological ethics, the ethical turn in design practice, and the value alignment of AI.
The design turn in the ethics of technology
The rise of the ethics of technology is closely related to technological philosophy. Technological philosophy can roughly be divided into three periods: classical technological philosophy, the empirical turn of technological philosophy, and the ethical turn of technological philosophy.
Classical philosophy of technology examines technology as an inseparable whole and emphasizes the dominant role of technology's autonomous power within human society. The empirical turn in the philosophy of technology primarily reflects a transition from abstract criticism to concrete analysis. This shift advocates for the construction of a ‘technology–life–world’ research paradigm by dissecting specific technical cases and emphasizes multidimensional empirical analyses of the design and usage processes of artificial objects. The shift promotes the intersection of the philosophy of technology with scientific and technological research, cognitive science and other fields, forming a theoretical framework of ‘human–technology mutual construction’. Following the empirical turn, the philosophy of technology underwent an ethical turn, moving from exploring the essence of technology and the laws of its development to an in-depth analysis of the ethical issues, value judgements and moral norms triggered by its application. However, this analytical perspective often focuses on technology's negative consequences and pays less attention to its positive ethical effects. Therefore, the ethics of technology needs a third turn; namely, the design turn.
The design turn in the ethics of technology does not imply that there will no longer be any form of normative assessment. Instead, it means that technology will no longer be regarded as an object of ethical thinking, but rather as a means to achieve certain ethical goals. This naturally combines the connection between ethical values and technological design, thus forming an internalist approach. This approach advocates that interdisciplinary personnel such as technical philosophers can directly intervene in the entire process of technical design, collaborate with designers to embed specific ethical attributes into technical products, and guide people's behavior in specific scenarios.
The ethical turn in design practice
The ethical turn in design practice aims to ensure the sustainability and social benefits of design, emphasizing designers’ sense of responsibility and moral concepts, and requiring the consideration of more ethical factors in the design process. The ethical turn has resulted in modern design no longer relating merely to the pursuit of perfection in form and function, but to placing a greater emphasis on its impact on society, the environment and humanity.
From a social perspective, the ethical turn in design practice is manifested as social design, which first requires designers to pay attention to social justice and inclusiveness. Designers should ensure that their designs serve all people, regardless of their race, gender, age or ability. It also requires designers to take into account cultural diversity and social identity. Designers should respect different cultural backgrounds and values and avoid discrimination or neglect of other cultures.
From an environmental perspective, the ethical turn is manifested in environmental design, which requires designers to consider sustainability. Designers must select renewable materials, energy-saving equipment and environmental-protection technologies to reduce ecological consumption. Ethical thinking in environmental design also requires designers to respect the natural environment and ecosystems. Designers should follow ecological principles and protect natural resources and biodiversity in their designs.
From a human perspective, the ethical turn is manifested not only in its focus on the present but also in its consideration of the long-term impact of design on the future of humanity. It encourages humans to actively conceive ethical designs as designers rather than passively accepting ethical education. This is the result of rethinking the development of design based on the significance of science and individual initiatives, emphasizing human qualities and identities (Wang, 2024).
The value alignment of AI
The core purpose of AI playing a varied and significant role in modern society is to simulate, extend and expand human intelligence and to build intelligent systems capable of autonomous perception, learning and decision-making to assist or replace humans in completing specific tasks. In recent years, large language models have become increasingly mature, but they have also engendered a dual emergence of capabilities and risks. The biased, false, deceptive and manipulative content of AI has aroused widespread attention and deep concern regarding its global governance (Zhang et al., 2023). To build a more responsible AI infrastructure, the top priority now is to infuse ethical, moral and cultural elements into the generation of intelligent systems, making them consistent or resonate with human values; that is, to research the value alignment of AI.
The value alignment of AI can be attempted through aspects such as language input, functional interaction and language communication (Leike et al., 2018). Based on programming language input, human–computer interaction is primarily achieved through instructions input into programming languages, and technicians enjoy the privilege of invoking computing resources (Gabriel, 2020). Based on functional interface interaction, although ordinary users can interact intuitively with intelligent machines through the front-end interface module, this kind of interaction is overly limited by specific interface design and standard operation norms (Chen et al., 2019). Based on natural language communication, the language models of AI, as a product of alignment technology, effectively reflect the interaction forms between human and computer languages. This includes ordinary users expressing their needs and intentions in a more natural and flexible way, and the corresponding system generating natural language to respond. Therefore, it can be seen that the essence of value alignment is to embed human values in intelligent technologies to ensure that technology is designed for good purposes, which is intrinsically consistent with the proposition of ‘embedding ethics in technology’.
The logical premises of embedding ethics in technology
The essence of embedding ethics in technology is to convert ethical values into design standards and achieve the translation from value to fact, which implies the reverse of the ‘Hume problem’. Therefore, the prerequisite for embedding ethical values in technical design is to respond reasonably to the limitations of the ‘Humean guillotine’. This necessitates an examination of the relationship between the embedding of ethics in technical design and the ‘Humean guillotine’ from the perspective of meta-ethics, analysing the limitations of the ‘Humean guillotine’ and exploring the ways to overcome these limitations. This leads to the potential to embed ethics in technology.
From the ‘Hume problem’ to the ‘Humean guillotine’
The ‘Hume problem’ originates from Hume's examination of the foundations of ethics. From an empiricist standpoint, he opposed rationalism's attempt to reduce ethical foundations to mere ‘reason’. However, due to the inherent limitations of empiricism, Hume's epistemological scepticism also extended to the foundations of ethics, leading him to argue that one cannot derive ‘ought’ from ‘is’ (Hume, 1999: 508). Hume's views and positions have been inherited and developed in meta-ethical schools such as intuitionism, emotivism and prescriptivism.
Intuitionism, emotivism and prescriptivism share the common feature of considering ethics to be independent of the realm of facts, denying the commensurability between facts and values. However, they fundamentally diverge on the ontological basis of ethics. Intuitionism belongs to ‘ethical realism’, positing that an objective reality exists behind ethical cognition and provides the criteria for judging the truth of ethical propositions. Unlike natural reality, ethical reality has its own unique character and cannot be reduced to natural facts; it can be perceived only through human intuition. Emotivism and prescriptivism, on the other hand, belong to ‘non-cognitivism’. They do not acknowledge the existence of an objective ethical reality behind ethical cognition, deny the cognitive functions of ethical judgement, and insist that ‘the function of ethical statements is not to convey knowledge but to express the speaker's emotions and commands’ (Gan, 2015: 221).
Both intuitionism and non-cognitivist ethics face insurmountable difficulties in their analytical approaches and theoretical logic. The problem with intuitionism is that it cannot provide a standard or measure for the correctness of intuition itself; nor can it tell us how to test and control intuition among different subjects (Gan, 2015: 230). The foundation of intuitionism is thus unstable. Non-cognitivism, on the other hand, denies that ethical statements possess any universal, truthful or objectively valid meaning, and it reduces ethical discussions to mere expressions and exchanges of emotions and opinions, thus completely severing the connection between ethics and rationality (Gan, 2015: 223). This is equivalent to admitting that ethical knowledge is entirely a reflection of subjective attitudes, which points in the direction of ethical relativism. Given the above, there is a need to break the ‘Humean guillotine’ and propose new pathways and solutions for bridging facts and values.
Attempts to break the ‘Humean guillotine’
Just as there are diverse schools of thought that uphold the ‘Humean guillotine’, those that oppose it are equally varied; they include naturalism, evolutionary ethics, pragmatism, neo-naturalism and neo-humanism. In his book
The collapse of the analytic/synthetic distinction offers valuable insights into the collapse of the fact/value dichotomy, as fact and value are also entangled. For example, the everyday term ‘cruel’ contains both descriptive and normative elements. Putnam (2002: 28) comments on this: ‘The example of the predicate “cruel” also suggests that the problem is not just that the empiricist's (and later, the logical positivist's) notion of a “fact” was much too narrow from the start. A deeper issue is that, from Hume on, empiricists—and many others as well, both in and outside the field of philosophy—failed to appreciate the ways in which factual description and valuation can and must be entangled.’ To address this, Putnam (2004: 16) proposed the concept of ‘value facts’: values are fact-based values, while facts are value-loaded facts, or in his words, ‘Every fact is value loaded and every one of our values reflects some fact.’
A design approach to bridging facts and values
By reviewing past debates on the ‘Hume problem’ and various proposals for bridging facts and values, a two-step approach can be proposed. This approach begins with the concept of value and divides it into two dimensions: utilitarian value (or practical value) and ethical value (Gong, 2014).
Transition from ‘fact’ to ‘utilitarian value’. Utilitarian value refers to the pursuit and recognition of material or practical benefits in life. It can be understood as value in the context of the subject–object relationship. Value is not determined solely by the subject or the object but by the object's ability to meet the subject's needs and its significance, which depends on both the subject and the object. The attributes of the object are a ‘fact’, and the needs of the subject are also a ‘fact’. Value is therefore created in the space between these two facts. If the fact of the object's attributes aligns with the fact of the subject's needs, value is created; otherwise, no or negative value is produced. In other words, value exists in the alignment of facts. When this alignment is met, value exists; when it is not met, value is absent (Zhang, 2017). This is the first step in the process of bridging fact and value. Transition from ‘utilitarian value’ to ‘ethical value’. Ethical value involves the pursuit and recognition of ethical ideals and can be understood as value in the context of the subject–subject relationship. Since utilitarian and ethical values are not entirely separate, ethical value cannot be achieved without utilitarian value. Without a foundation in practical benefits, ethical value becomes an unstable, baseless construct. The principle of ‘unity of virtue and fortune’ emphasizes their consistency. However, they should also not be conflated. Reducing ethical value to utilitarian value in its entirety would strip it of its independence and sanctity, leading to a utilitarian society in which everything is judged by its usefulness and profit, ultimately degrading social ethos and morale. The two major ethical schools—utilitarianism and deontology—represent these opposing trends: the former conflating the two and the latter separating them entirely. Therefore, in addressing the transition from utilitarian to ethical value, a dialectical attitude that maintains both opposition and unity is required.
As a practical activity, design must begin with existing facts and aim to achieve a certain value. Design embodies the negative unity between humans and the world and is a practical way to unify fact with value and regularity with purpose. Thus, by establishing logical connections between facts and utilitarian value, and between utilitarian and ethical values, it is possible to translate ethical values into design standards, thereby answering the question of how ethics can be embedded in technology.
Chinese and Western design approaches to embedding ethics in technology
Western countries and China exhibit significant cultural differences with respect to their design approaches to embedding ethics in technology. The Western approach is mainly represented by modern design such as VSD, materializing morality, and RRI, while the Chinese approach is represented by traditional designs such as ‘embedding rituals in artifacts’ (Confucianism), ‘incorporating Dao into techniques’ (Taoism) and ‘integrating Chan Buddhism into craftsmanship’ (Buddhism). These two approaches have distinct features: the former emphasizes mind-based thinking, while the latter focuses on heart-based thinking. Both approaches possess unique strengths and are complementary to one another.
Western design approaches to embedding ethics in technology
VSD, which focuses on embedding human ethical values into technology, was proposed by Batya Friedman and Peter H Kahn Jr at the University of Washington (Friedman and Kahn, 2002). VSD employs a tripartite methodology, including conceptual, empirical and technical analysis. Conceptual analysis aims to understand and clarify stakeholders in technology design and identify potential value conflicts among them. Empirical analysis uses qualitative and quantitative methods to assess how stakeholders perceive value in the aspects they consider important. Technical analysis explores how to draw on the insights of the other analyses and design a particular technology to support established values (Manders-Huits, 2011).
The application of Verbeek's ‘materializing morality’ theory to design activities is reflected in a ‘predict–assess–design’ model. The primary goal of prediction is to understand the mediating role of technology. Since technology is multi-stable and lacks a fixed essence, what constitutes a technology depends on its context and users’ understanding. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a link between design context and use context (Verbeek, 2010: 97–98). The second step is the ethical assessment of mediation, which expands upon the process of stakeholder analysis. Traditional stakeholder analysis enables all stakeholders to articulate their perspectives on ethical issues and seek a comprehensive and balanced solution by weighing these diverse viewpoints (Verbeek, 2010: 106). The assessment process, however, integrates considerations of the mediating role of technology, thereby expanding the scope of stakeholder analysis beyond traditional risk analysis and disclosure. The third step is the design of technological mediation. The final outcome of design is a product of the interaction between users, designers and artifacts. Therefore, the design process is not about creating a new product category but about transforming and improving the ‘script’ of existing products so as to enhance their function of ethical guidance (Verbeek, 2010: 117).
RRI integrates technological ethics, corporate social responsibility and technological innovation. It focuses on the major social and environmental issues arising from technological innovation and seeks solutions from ethical, responsible and policy perspectives (Wiarda and Van de Kaa, 2021). RRI emphasizes the future-oriented and prospective dimensions of responsibility, making it possible for technology design to consider its purpose and adapt to uncertainty. RRI includes four dimensions: anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion and responsiveness. The anticipatory dimension involves forecasting the potential impacts of technology. The reflexive dimension involves analysing and reflecting on one's fundamental purposes and motivations, and the potential impacts of technology design activities. The inclusive dimension involves engaging the public and stakeholders through dialogue, participation and debate to solicit their opinions. The responsive dimension involves using collective reflexivity to engage in technology governance (Owen and Goldberg, 2010).
Chinese design approaches to embedding ethics in technology
The Chinese design approach to embedding ethics in technology primarily refers to the approach rooted in traditional Chinese culture. It is rich in intellectual resources and highly complementary to the Western approach. However, it requires creative transformation to fully realize its potential in modern design activities. The traditional Chinese design approach mainly includes Confucian, Taoist and Buddhist perspectives.
The Confucian design approach is characterized by the principle of ‘embedding rituals in artifacts’. This principle involves designing and manufacturing objects following ritual requirements. It not only reflects the owner's social status but, more importantly, reinforces the concept of ritual through objects, thereby fulfilling the ‘silent educational function’ embedded in the artifacts (Zhang, 2024). ‘Embedding rituals in artifacts’ is also known as ‘using artifacts to embody rituals’, ‘designing artifacts according to ritual norms’ or ‘integrating rituals into artifacts’. The ingenuity of this approach lies in integrating the ritual into the objects themselves. This is achieved by using methods such as observing rituals in form and sum, mirroring rituals with materials and craftsmanship, embedding rituals in decorative patterns, aligning functions with rituals, carrying rituals through inscriptions, and establishing rituals through spatial arrangement.
‘Form’ refers to the appearance and specifications of objects, while ‘sum’ refers to the required quantity and combination of objects. For example,
The Taoist concept of ‘incorporating Dao into techniques’ emphasizes guiding specific technical (techniques or arts) practices with the wisdom of Dao, integrating Dao into technical design, and using technical practice as a ladder with which to reach the realm of Dao. This approach mainly reflects the concept that technique is guided by Dao in technical activities through such processes as using technique to symbolize Dao, evolution from technique to Dao, and the mutual generation of Dao and technique. ‘Using technique to symbolize Dao’ refers to using the concrete technique to symbolize the abstract Dao, providing people with a concrete entry point through which to understand the abstract Dao. The profound and mysterious nature of Dao makes it difficult for ordinary people to grasp directly. However, by using a technique closely related to daily life as a metaphor, Dao can become more vivid and easier to understand. The ‘evolution from technique to Dao’ is achieved through long-term study and practice of the technique, ultimately grasping the essence of Dao. This concept emphasizes pursuing an understanding of the essential laws of things on the basis of mastering specific skills; that is, it expresses the process of how to cultivate Dao. The concept of ‘mutual generation of Dao and technique’ is to lead Dao towards its ultimate target form; that is, to demonstrate the interdependence and mutual promotional relationship between Dao and techniques or arts.
The Buddhist approach of ‘integrating Chan Buddhism into craftsmanship’ introduces the concepts and aesthetic principles of Chan Buddhism into the field of technological design to elevate the realm of craftsmanship or innovate the application of technology. This can be achieved by using methods such as the observing technique, listening technique, smelling technique, tasting technique, touching technique and enlightenment technique. The observing technique involves exploring the various aspects of a technology through visual observation, including the shapes, colors, sizes and structures of products, to gain a more comprehensive understanding of it. The listening technique entails extracting key auditory features, such as sound frequencies, timbre, pitch and tempo, from products to reveal the emotional expressions of the technology. The smelling and tasting techniques refer to identifying the characteristics of products through the senses of smell and taste, in search of healthier and more environmentally friendly technological products. The touching technique involves feeling the form and texture of products through tactile means to achieve more harmonious human–technology interaction. The enlightenment technique integrates the above five senses to intuitively grasp the principles of the Chan Buddhism and interests embedded in technology, thereby enhancing the design aesthetics and ethical profile of technological applications. As stated in the
Mutual learning between Chinese and Western design approaches to embedding ethics in technology
The Chinese and Western design approaches to embedding ethics each have their own unique features. The Western approach primarily features ‘one-on-one’ embedding, focusing on comparing the ethical differences and impacts among similar entities. It enhances and innovates ethical attributes based on an understanding of the scale, quantity, and pros and cons of similar entities, presenting the expansionary pattern of ethics development; that is, the horizontal development of embedding results. Grounded in this approach, the Western process of embedding ethics emphasizes logical analysis, the construction of rational knowledge systems, and the establishment of technical standards. It reflects a predominantly brain-based way of thinking. In contrast, the Chinese approach emphasizes comparing entities across different historical stages, understanding the inherent laws of their development, and recognizing their developmental phases and trends. This approach enables a comprehensive grasp of entities, presenting the evolutionary pattern of embedding results. Because of this, the Chinese process of embedding ethics focuses on the integrity, organic structure and experiential aspects of design and reflects a predominantly heart-based way of thinking.
According to modern neuroscience, the human brain is primarily composed of the left and right hemispheres (also known as the left and right brains) and the limbic system. Brain-based thinking is typically dominated by the left brain (with the right brain and limbic system playing supportive and coordinating roles), while heart-based thinking is dominated by the right brain and limbic system (with the left brain playing a supportive and coordinating role). The right brain mainly governs activities such as visual thinking, imagination, intuition and creativity (Blakeslee, 1980), while the limbic system's functions involve complex processes related to visceral activities, bodily movements and emotions, integrating the entire body's experiences into the brain (Meng, 1989: 4–16). As such, heart-based thinking also encompasses emotional, intuitive and experiential elements, which are beyond the scope of brain-based thinking.
The distinct characteristics of brain-based and heart-based thinking give rise to differences such as logic versus experience, tangible versus intangible, and macro versus micro perspectives.
First, in terms of the respective strengths of logic and experience, the brain-based Western design approach excels in applying logical design thinking. Logical design thinking focuses on connecting and organizing design elements to form a relatively complete system. For instance, the RRI approach transforms responsibility from external to internal and from individual to collective through its four dimensions of anticipation, reflexivity, inclusion and responsiveness. In contrast, the heart-based Chinese design approach excels in applying experiential design thinking. Experiential design thinking emphasizes the process of personal experience. The experience gained from designers’ hands-on practice differs from theoretical research, allowing the designer to resonate with the objects and enhance the emotional connections and interactions between humans and technology, and among humans themselves. The direct engagement provided by experience also facilitates a deeper understanding of the essence of things, generating lasting impressions and memories.
Second, on the respective strengths of the tangible and intangible, the guidance function of the Western design approach is primarily achieved through tangible materialization, under which the ethical guidance of technology is provided mainly in the form of physical objects. For example, speed bumps make drivers slow down through their psychological influence. Speed bumps may reduce drivers’ sense of safety and comfort, prompting them to choose a lower speed. In contrast, the Chinese design approach tends to guide ethics in a more suggestive way, invisibly integrating ethics into human consciousness. This approach not only increases the requirements on materialization but also calls for more consideration of human factors in artifact design—a method also called empathic design. Compared to humans passively receiving guidance from artifacts, intangible materialization creates a more friendly and comfortable relationship in human–technology interactions. For example, in ancient times, the design of bows and arrows had to take into account the user's temperament. A person with a fierce temper should choose a softer bow, as it could help them curb their impatient tendencies.
Finally, on the respective strengths of macro and micro perspectives, the Western design approaches, such as VSD, materializing morality and RRI, focus on realizing ethical attributes like value, morality and responsibility in human–technology interaction. As a result, the Western design approaches tend to focus on the technology itself or the interaction between humans and technology, emphasizing individualism and individual rights, which can all be seen as micro dimensions of design. In contrast, the Chinese design approaches, including ‘embedding rituals in artifacts’, ‘governing techniques with Dao’ and ‘integrating Chan Buddhism into technology’, use design to reinforce the concepts of ritual, Dao and Chan, thus fulfilling the educational functions inherent in Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism. Education is not simply about knowledge transmission but also represents an intangible influence of cultural institutions, such as customs, ethics and morality. Although they do not hold legal force, they have a significant impact on social behavior. This is also an indication of the institutional design of the Chinese approach, which tends to adopt a macro perspective.
In summary, the differences between the logical and experiential approaches to design, between the tangible and intangible forms of embedding, and between the micro and macro design perspectives showcase the respective strengths of Chinese and Western design approaches. Separating the two would create limitations. Intangible materialization is not suitable for all designers. For individuals or groups who do not listen to advice, feel reluctant to accept others’ opinions, or even ignore others on purpose, intangible materialization could be powerless. Intangible materialization might not work effectively for those with weak perceptive abilities, either. Therefore, it is necessary to form a pattern of mutual learning between Chinese and Western approaches to develop a more comprehensive and in-depth design approach for embedding ethics in technology.
The integration of Chinese and Western design approaches: Heart–brain collaborative design
Heart–brain collaborative design leverages the strengths of both Chinese and Western design approaches, combining the cognitive model and methods of heart-based thinking with brain-based modern design theories. It stresses the importance of design principles such as harmony with nature, governing techniques with Dao, deep experience, and ingenious craftsmanship.
The principle of ‘harmony with nature’ means respecting the natural essence of things in technological design. Activities that violate the natural essence of things will ultimately harm oneself or others through various pathways. Shortening the natural processes of technological activities will inevitably lead to abnormalities that go against Dao. Designs that are in harmony with nature must try their best to use raw materials derived from nature and ensure that these materials return to nature after use, thereby achieving unity between creation and decomposition (Wang, 2011: 143–145).
The principle of ‘governing techniques with Dao’ emphasizes the general societal effects of technological practices. It fully considers the harmony of various elements related to technological activities in advance and promptly identifies and eliminates any disharmonious relationships, allowing technological activities to develop reasonably within the realm of human control.
The principle of ‘deep experience’ demands a thorough understanding of the societal impacts of technological structures and functions, as well as a ‘heart-based’ approach to uncover the organic connections that are often overlooked by ‘brain-based’ design thinking. This is reflected in the design process that delves into details, appreciates the contexts experienced by the manufacturers, users and other stakeholders of technological products, and gives holistic consideration to the ethical consequences of embedding ethics in technology.
The principle of ‘ingenious craftsmanship’ refers to creativity that is unique and avoids the trap of mere craftsmanship. The success of ingenious craftsmanship can bring ‘harmony with nature’ to its ultimate level, make ‘governing techniques with the Dao’ invisible, and seamlessly connect ‘deep experience’ with technological innovation. These four basic principles are conceptually interconnected, reflecting the possibility of embedding their respective ethical attributes into technological innovation activities from different perspectives.
Heart–brain collaborative design consciously guides the conception and operation of technological design through four stages: analysis, examination, conceptualization and feedback. In this context, the process of embedding ethical elements in design activities must first determine which ethical elements to embed. This involves leveraging the intuitive experiential strengths of heart-based thinking to identify the design-related elements that are truly felt by the designers, as well as the functional attributes and ethical factors within the relationships of these elements, and present them with appropriate images. On this basis, images are established by observing the objects, and vessels are created by emulating the images (Zhu, 2022: 121–122).
The ethical elements identified during design activities are examined by placing their images within the context of design practices. The focus is on examining their relationship with the designer's original values and psychological state and making necessary adjustments. The conceptualization of the heart–brain collaborative design approach must be completed in conjunction with adjustments to the structure and function of the product, which are both independent and interdependent. It is therefore necessary to ensure that the embedding of ethical elements is technically sound in structure and reliable in function, to meet the requirement of ‘governing techniques with Dao’. Feedback on the effectiveness of heart–brain collaborative design requires designers to have a stronger sensitivity to values and a greater sense of social responsibility. They should conscientiously listen to opinions from all sides and leverage advanced information-management systems to establish feedback and evaluation mechanisms, thereby ensuring tangible results from the efforts to embed ethics in technology.
To summarize, in practical applications, the concept of heart–brain collaborative design could meet the requirements for embedding ethics in technology more comprehensively and profoundly. This approach not only fills the gap in the prevailing design approaches to embedding ethics in technology but also contributes to the creative transformation and innovative development of traditional Chinese culture. Of course, to promote the development of heart–brain collaborative design, it is essential to encourage the participation of more technical ethicists and relevant interdisciplinary personnel, further strengthen cultural confidence in modern design activities, and boost the global influence of the ‘Designed by China’ discourse system.
Footnotes
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Research Planning Fund Project ‘Research on Ethical Embedment Mechanism of Technology Design’, (grant number 24YJA720012).
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Author biographies
Wei Zhang is a professor and a doctoral supervisor of philosophy at the School of Humanities of Dalian University of Technology. He is also the executive director of the Professional Committee of Science and Technology Ethics of China Ethics Society, the director of the Professional Committee of Science, Technology and Engineering Ethics of the Chinese Society for Dialectics of Nature, and the director of the society's Scientific and Cultural Committee and Technical Philosophy Committee. His main research interests include the philosophy of technology and the ethics of science and technology.
Yu Jing is a PhD candidate at the School of Humanities of Dalian University of Technology. His main research interests include design ethics, the philosophy of technology and the ethics of technology.
Qian Wang is a professor and a doctoral supervisor of philosophy at the School of Humanities of Dalian University of Technology. He used to be the deputy dean of the School of Scholar and Literature of Dalian University of Technology, the deputy director of the Academic Committee of Dalian University of Technology, and the director of the Special Committee of Philosophy and Social Sciences. He is the executive director of the Chinese Society for Dialectics of Nature, and the director of the society's Professional Committee of Science, Technology and Engineering Ethics. He is also a member of the Advisory Committee of the Science Planning and Ethics Research Support Center of the Faculty of Chinese Academy of Sciences, and a member of the Special Expert Group of Science and Technology Ethics Education of the Ministry of Education. For many years, he has devoted himself to the research of science and technology ethics, technology philosophy and organism philosophy.