| 1. |
- Surber, Nicholas, 1992, et al.
(författare)
-
Implicit Values in the Recent Carbon Nanotube Debate
- 2023
-
Ingår i: NanoEthics. - 1871-4757 .- 1871-4765. ; 17:10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) are one of the first examples of nanotechnology, with a history of promising uses and high expectations. This paper uses the recent debate over their future to explore both ethical and value-laden statements which unsettle the notion of CNTs as a value-free nanotechnology and their regulation as purely a technical affair. A point of departure is made with the inclusion of CNTs on the Substitute-It-Now list by the Swedish NGO ChemSec, an assessment process that anticipates and complements the Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation in Europe. An argument map is constructed to illustrate the core contention in the debate—should CNTs be substituted or not—which follows from a systematic literature review and content analysis of sampled journal articles. Nine arguments are articulated that bolster one of two camps: the pro-substitution camp or the contra-substitution camp. Beneath these arguments are a set of three implicit values that animate these two camps in prescribing competing interventions to resolve the dispute: (i) environmental protection and human safety, (ii) good science, and (iii) technological progress. This leads to a discussion around the regulatory problem of safeguarding conflicting values in decision-making under sustained scientific uncertainty. Finally, the study suggests further empirical work on specific nanomaterials in a pivot away from the abstract, promissory nature of nanotechnology and other emerging technologies in science, technology, and innovation policy. The examination of ethics and values is useful for mapping controversies in science and technology studies of regulation, even amongst experts in cognate research fields like nanomedicine and nanotoxicology.
|
|
| 2. |
- de Fine Licht, Karl, 1979
(författare)
-
Behavioral designs defined: how to understand and why it is important to differentiate between “defensive,” “hostile,” “disciplinary”, and other designs in the urban landscape
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Urban Design International. - 1468-4519 .- 1357-5317. ; 28:4, s. 330-343
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In recent years, a growing discussion about how we should design our cities has emerged, particularly for the more controversial modes of design such as “defensive,” “hostile,” or “disciplinary” architecture (i.e., benches on which one cannot sleep, or metal studs on which one cannot skate). Although this debate is relatively mature, many studies have argued that these design notions are undertheorized and are, thus, challenging to study from an empirical and normative perspective. In this paper, I will define the most common terms used in the literature and show how they are interconnected by utilizing a set of “conditions of adequacy” from philosophy to facilitate a more transparent and well-grounded discussion of them. Terms such as “hostile” and “defensive” design are underlined by several different phenomena, not just one as is sometimes commonly assumed. I will also show that these phenomena and their conceptualizations require—and sometimes force us to use—different moral reasons when justifying the utilization of different designs.
|
|
| 3. |
- de Fine Licht, Karl, 1979
(författare)
-
Integrating Large Language Models into Higher Education: Guidelines for Effective Implementation
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Computer Sciences & Mathematics Forum. ; 8:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The emergence of large language models (LLMs), such as OpenAI’s GPT-4, introduces transformative opportunities for higher education across various disciplines. While the integration of LLMs into higher education has sparked significant debate regarding whether to fully incorporate these systems into curricula or restrict their use, this paper contends that there has been an inadequate focus on the process of establishing suitable guidelines for their usage. Given the importance of stakeholder buy in, especially in terms of perceiving the final decision as legitimate, this paper advocates for transparent and inclusive procedures that involve faculty, administration, and students during the integration process. Once a decision is made, clear justifications for LLM guidelines should be provided, paired with an effective implementation strategy, to ensure widespread acceptance and adherence.
|
|
