“Just wrong,” “disgusting,” “grotesque,” “offensive”: How to deal with public rejection of new potentially life-saving technologies
Weijers, D. M. (2018). ‘Just wrong,’ ‘disgusting,’ ‘grotesque,’ ‘offensive’: How to deal with public rejection of new potentially life-saving technologies. Presented at the The Waikato Dialogue: The Implications of Emerging Disruptive Technologies for International Security and New Zealand, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Permanent Research Commons link: https://hdl.handle.net/10289/12469
New technologies can offer solutions to security concerns, such as preventing terrorist attacks. Many new technologies are criticised on moral grounds, leading some potentially life-saving technologies to be left on the shelf (in a folder marked “rejected ideas”). In this talk, I present a procedural framework for policymakers to use when a potentially beneficial new technology is deemed morally repugnant by members of the public. The framework takes into account the possibility of different and conflicting moral beliefs, and indicates the appropriate response to moral repugnance about potentially beneficial new technologies. The example of “PAM”, the proposed anti-terrorist prediction market is used to illustrate the framework.
© 2018 copyright with the author.