Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T14:18:58.532Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Passion for the Art of Morally Responsible Technology Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2019

Sabine Roeser  and
Steffen Steinert
Sabine Roeser*
Affiliation:
Sabine Roeser and Steffen Steinert, Ethics and Philosophy of Technology Section, Department of VTI, Faculty of TPM, Delft University of Technology
Steffen Steinert
Affiliation:
Sabine Roeser and Steffen Steinert, Ethics and Philosophy of Technology Section, Department of VTI, Faculty of TPM, Delft University of Technology
*
Corresponding author: Sabine Roeser, s.roeser@tudelft.nl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, we discuss the importance of emotions for ethical reflection on technological developments, as well as the role that art can play in this. We review literature that argues that emotions can and should play an important role in the assessment and acceptance of technological risk and in designing morally responsible technologies. We then investigate how technologically engaged art can contribute to critical, emotional-moral reflection on technological risks. The role of art that engages with technology is unexplored territory and gives rise to many fascinating philosophical questions that have not yet been sufficiently addressed in the literature.

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 85: Passions and the Emotions , July 2019 , pp. 87 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Roeser, S., Risk, technology, and moral emotions (New York: Routledge, 2018)Google Scholar.

2 Shrader-Frechette, K.S., ‘Risk and rationality: Philosophical foundations for populist reforms’ (Berkeley, CA etc.: University of California Press, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hansson, Sven Ove, ‘Dimensions of Risk’, Risk Analysis 9 (1989): 107–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hansson, Sven Ove, ‘A Panorama of the Philosophy of Risk’, in Roeser, Sabine, Hillerbrand, Rafaela, Peterson, Martin and Sandin, Per (eds), Handbook of Risk Theory (Springer, 2012), 27–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, ‘Ethical Intuitions about Risks’, Safety Science Monitor 11 (2007), 1–30Google Scholar; Roeser, S., Risk, technology, and moral emotions (New York: Routledge, 2018)Google Scholar; Asveld, Lotte and Roeser, Sabine (eds), The Ethics of Technological Risk (London: Routledge / Earthscan, 2009)Google Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, Hillerbrand, Rafaela, Peterson, Martin and Sandin, Per, Handbook of Risk Theory (Dordrecht: Springer, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Siegrist, Michael and Gutscher, Heinz (eds), Trust in Risk Management: Uncertainty and Scepticism in the Public Mind (Routledge, 2010)Google Scholar; Jasanoff, Sheila, Science and Public Reason (Routledge / Earthscan, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 Slovic, Paul, The Perception of Risk (London: Earthscan, 2000)Google Scholar; Bammer, Gabriele and Smithson, Michael (eds), Uncertainty and Risk: Multidisciplinary Perspectives (Earthscan / Routledge, 2008)Google Scholar.

5 Asveld, L. and Roeser, S. (eds), The Ethics of Technological Risk (London: Routledge, 2009)Google Scholar.

6 Slovic, Paul, The Feeling of Risk (London: Earthscan, 2010)Google Scholar; Roeser, Sabine (ed.), Emotions and Risky Technologies (Dordrecht: Springer, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Sunstein, Cass R., Laws of Fear (Cambridge University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sunstein, Cass R., ‘Moral Heuristics and Risk’ in Roeser, Sabine (ed.), Emotions and Risky Technologies (Dordrecht: Springer, 2010), 3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; On Dual Process Theory see Kahneman, Daniel, Thinking Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011)Google Scholar.

8 Frijda, N. H., The Emotions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986)Google Scholar; Lazarus, R. S., Emotion and Adaptation (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991)Google Scholar; Nussbaum, Martha, Upheavals of Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001CrossRefGoogle Scholar); Roberts, R. C., Emotions: An Essay in Aid of Moral Psychology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

9 Hall, Cheryl, The Trouble with Passion: Political Theory Beyond the Reign of Reason (New York: Routledge, 2005)Google Scholar; Kingston, Rebecca, Public Passion: Rethinking the Grounds for Political Justice (McGill-Queen's University Press, 2011)Google Scholar; Staiger, Janet, Cvetkovich, Ann, Reynolds, Ann (eds), Political Emotions (Routledge, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nussbaum, Martha, Political Emotions: Why Love Matters for Justice (Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press, 2013)Google Scholar.

10 Roeser, Sabine, ‘The Role of Emotions in Judging the Moral Acceptability of Risks’, Safety Science 44 (2006): 689–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, ‘The Relation between Cognition and Affect in Moral Judgments about Risk’, in Asveld and Roeser (eds), The Ethics of Technological Risk (London: Earthscan, 2009), 182–201Google Scholar; S. Roeser, ‘Emotions and risky technologies’ (2010); Roeser, S., Risk, Technology, and Moral Emotions, (London: Routledge, 2018)Google Scholar.

11 Op. cit. note 7.

12 Mark Alfano and Nicole Huijts, ‘Trust and distrust in institutions and governance’, in J. Simon (ed.), Handbook of Trust and Philosophy, (London: Routledge, forthcoming).

13 Op. cit. note 2.

14 For the acceptance/ acceptability distinction see Taebi, Behnam, ‘Bridging the Gap between Social Acceptance and Ethical Acceptability’, Risk Analysis 37 (2017), 1817–1827CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. Further, it is important to note here that in environmental psychology, the notion ‘acceptability’ is often used in the way that we introduced acceptance here. For example, see Perlaviciute, G., Steg, L., Contzen, N., Roeser, S., & Huijts, N., ‘Emotional Responses to Energy Projects: Insights for Responsible Decision Making in a Sustainable Energy Transition’, Sustainability 10 (2018), 2526CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 van de Poel, Ibo, ‘Can we Design for Well-being?’, in Brey, Philip, Briggle, Adam, Spence, Edward (eds), Good Life in a Technological Age (Routledge, New York, 2012), 295–306Google Scholar.

16 Further distinctions and fine-grained elaborations of concepts related to acceptance are possible. For example, one can distinguish between the subject and object of acceptability, where the object of acceptability can be either the technical design or the institutional design. The subject of acceptability is either the community, the market or the general public. For this distinction see Künneke, R., Mehos, D. C., Hillerbrand, R., and Hemmes, K., ‘Understanding values embedded in offshore wind energy systems: Toward a purposeful institutional and technological design’, Environmental Science & Policy 53 (2015), 118–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Bettiga, D. and Lamberti, L., ‘Exploring the role of anticipated emotions in product adoption and usage’, Journal of Consumer Marketing 35 (2018), 300–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Rieple, Alison and Snijders, Sylvia, ‘The role of emotions in the choice to adopt, or resist, innovations by Irish dairy farmers’, Journal of Business Research 85 (2018), 23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Read, W., Robertson, N., McQuilken, L., ‘A novel romance: The Technology Acceptance Model with emotional attachment’, Australasian Marketing Journal 19 (2011), 223–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Asveld, L. and Roeser, S. (eds), The Ethics of Technological Risk (London: Routledge, 2009)Google Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, Hillerbrand, Rafaela, Peterson, Martin and Sandin, Per, Handbook of Risk Theory (Dordrecht: Springer, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Op. cit. note 8.

22 Roeser, Sabine, ‘The Role of Emotions in Judging the Moral Acceptability of Risks’, Safety Science 44 (2006), 689–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, Pesch, Udo, ‘An Emotional Deliberation Approach to Risk’, Science, Technology, & Human Values 41 (2016), 274–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Roeser, S., Risk, Technology, and Moral Emotions (New York: Routledge, 2018)Google Scholar.

24 Huijts, Nicole M. A., ‘The emotional dimensions of energy projects: Anger, fear, joy and pride about the first hydrogen fuel station in the Netherlands’, Energy Research & Social Science 44 (2018), 138–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 van Asselt, Marjolein and Rijkens-Klomp, Nicole ‘A Look in the Mirror: Reflection on Participation in Integrated Assessment from a Methodological Perspective’, Global Environmental Change 12 (2002), 167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 van den Hoven, Jeroen, Doorn, Neelke, Siwerstra, Tsjalling, Koops, Bert-Jaap and Rmijn, Henny (eds) Responsible Innovation (Dordrecht: Springer, 2014)Google Scholar.

27 Taebi, B., Correljé, A., Cuppen, E., Dignum, M., and Pesch, U., ‘Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: the need for interdisciplinary research’, Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (2014), 118–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Roeser, Sabine and Pesch, Udo (2016), ‘An Emotional Deliberation Approach to Risk’, Science, Technology and Human Values 41: 274–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 Op. cit. note 1.

30 Hoven, J. van den ‘ICT and value sensitive design’, in Goujon, P., Lavelle, S., Duquenoy, P., Kimppa, K., and Laurent, V. (eds), The Information Society: Innovation, Legitimacy, Ethics and Democracy (Boston: Springer, 2007)Google Scholar; van den Hoven, Jeroen, Vermaas, Pieter E., van de Poel, Ibo (eds), Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design: Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains, (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

31 Friedman, B., ‘Value sensitive design’, in Bainbridge, W. S. (ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Computer Interaction (Berkshire: Great Barrington, 2004), 769–774Google Scholar.

32 It needs to be noted here that what values are is subject to debate and that VSD has been criticized for not having a developed notion of value. For this critique see Manders-Huits, Noëmi, ‘What Values in Design? The Challenge of Incorporating Moral Values into Design’, Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (2011), 271–287CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. Suffice it to say here that values in VSD are commonly taken to mean things that people consider important to their live. For the notion of value in VSD see Cummings, Mary L., ‘Integrating ethics in design through the value-sensitive design approach’, Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (2006), 701–15CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

33 For the methods of VSD see Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H. Jr, Borning, A., ‘Value sensitive design and information systems’, in Zhang, P., Galletta, D. (eds), Human-Computer Interaction in Management Information Systems: Foundations (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 2006), 348–372Google Scholar, and also B. Friedman, P. Kahn and A. Borning, ‘Value Sensitive Design: Theory and Methods’, UW Computer Science and Engineering Technical Report (2002).

34 Hoven, J. Van den, ‘Value Sensitive Design and Responsible Innovation’, in Owen, R., Bessant, J. and Heintz, M. (eds), Responsible Innovation: Managing the Responsible Emergence of Science and Innovation in Society (Hoboken: Wiley 2013)Google Scholar.

35 Perlaviciute, G., Steg, L., Contzen, N., Roeser, S. and Huijts, N., ‘Emotional Responses to Energy Projects: Insights for Responsible Decision Making in a Sustainable Energy Transition’, Sustainability 10 (2018), 2526CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 Van de Poel, Ibo, ‘Conflicting Values in Design for Values’ in van den Hoven, Jeroen, Vermaas, Pieter E., van de Poel, Ibo (eds), Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design: Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains (Dordrecht: Springer, 2015), 89–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Desmet, P. M. A., Roeser, and S., ‘Emotions in Design for Values’, in van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P. E., van de Poel, I. (eds), Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design, (Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2015), 208Google Scholar.

38 Fokkinga, Steven, Desmet, Pieter, ‘Darker Shades of Joy: The Role of Negative Emotion in Rich Product Experiences’, Design Issues 28 (2012), 42–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Ozkaramanli, Deger, Desmet, Pieter, ‘I know I shouldn't, yet I did it again! Emotion-driven design as a means to subjective wellbeing’, International Journal of Design 6 (2012), 27–39Google Scholar.

40 Desmet, Pieter, ‘Faces of Product Pleasure: 25 Positive Emotions in Human-Product Interactions’, International Journal of Design 6 (2012), 1–29Google Scholar.

41 Roeser, Sabine, ‘Emotional Engineers: Toward Morally Responsible Engineering’, Science and Engineering Ethics 18:1 (2012), 103–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 Hutchinson, Alisa and Tracey, Monica, ‘Designers’ own emotions and the practice of designing: a literature review and preliminary research agenda’, Journal of Design Research 15 (2017), 197CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Biagioli, Monica, Grimaldi, Silvia and Ali, Hena, ‘Designer's emotions in the design process’, in Design Research Society 2018: Catalyst, 25–28 (June 2018, Limerick, Ireland)Google Scholar.

43 Davis, M., ‘In Praise of Emotion in Engineering’, in Michelfelder, D. P., Newberry, B., Zhu, Q. (eds), Philosophy and Engineering (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2017), 181–94Google Scholar.

44 Op. cit. note 10, 190.

45 Roeser, Sabine, ‘Intuitions, Emotions and Gut Feelings in Decisions about Risks: Towards a Different Interpretation of “Neuroethics”’, The Journal of Risk Research 13 (2010), 175–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, ‘Emotional Reflection about Risks’, in Roeser, S. (ed.) Emotions and Risky Technologies (Springer, 2010), 231–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roeser, Sabine, Moral Emotions and Intuitions (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

46 Kahan, Dan, ‘Cultural Cognition as a Conception of the Cultural Theory of Risk’, in Roeser, Sabine, Hillerbrand, Rafaela, Peterson, Martin and Sandin, Per (eds) Handbook of Risk Theory (Dordrecht: Springer, 2012), 725–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Greene, J.D., Moral Tribes (New York: Penguin, 2013)Google Scholar; Haidt, Jonathan, The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion (New York: Vintage Books, 2012)Google Scholar.

47 Levinson, Jerrold (ed.), Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Carroll, Noel, Beyond Aesthetics: Philosophical Essays (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nussbaum, Martha, Upheavals of Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gaut, Berys, Art, Emotion and Ethics (Oxford University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Bermúdez, José Luis and Gardner, Sebastian (eds), Art and Morality (London: Routledge, 2006)Google Scholar.

48 Adorno, Theodor, Benjamin, Walter, Bloch, Ernst, Brecht, Bertold, Lukacs, Georg, Aesthetics and Politics (New York: Verso, 1980)Google Scholar; Rorty, Richard, Irony, Contingency, and Solidarity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Groys, Boris, Art Power (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bleiker, Roland, Aesthetics and World Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kingston, Rebecca, Public Passion: Rethinking the Grounds for Political Justice (McGill-Queen's University Press, 2011)Google Scholar; Kompridis, Nikolas (ed.), The Aesthetic Turn in Political Thought (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014)Google Scholar; Macneill, Paul (ed.), Ethics and the Arts (Dordrecht: Springer, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

49 Slovic, Scott and Slovic, Paul (eds) Numbers and Nerves: Information, Emotion, and Meaning in a World of Data (Corvallis, Oregon: Oregon State University Press, 2015)Google Scholar.

50 For extensive overviews see: Reichle, Ingeborg, Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art (Vienna, New York: Springer, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wilson, Stephen, Art + Science Now: How scientific research and technological innovation are becoming key to 21st-century aesthetics (London: Thames and Hudson, 2010)Google Scholar; Myers, William, Bio Art: Altered Realities (London: Thames and Hudson, 2015)Google Scholar.

51 Noë, Alva, Strange Tools: Art and Human Nature (New York: Hill and Wang, 2015)Google Scholar.

52 Future of Life Institute (2015) ‘Research Priorities for Robust and beneficial artificial intelligence’ http://futureoflife.org/ai-open-letter/

53 A collection of essays on Stelarc can be found in Zylinska, , Joanna, (ed.), The Cyborg Experiments: The Extensions of the Body in the Media Age (Continuum, 2002)Google Scholar.

54 Mampuys, Ruth and Roeser, Sabine, ‘Risk Considerations in Using GMO Viruses as Medicine; a conflict of emotions?’ Journal of Disaster Research 6 (2011), 514–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

55 Goriss-Hunter, Anitra, ‘Slippery Mutants Perform and Wink at Maternal Insurrections: Patricia Piccinini's Monstrous Cute’, Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 18 (2004): 541–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 For more on this issue see the contributions in Taebi, Behnam and Roeser, Sabine (eds), The Ethics of Nuclear Energy (Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Mobley, Catherine, Vagias, Wade, and DeWard, Sarah, ‘Exploring Additional Determinants of Environmentally Responsible Behavior: The Influence of Environmental Literature and Environmental Attitudes’, Environment and Behavior 42 (2010): 420–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

58 Sabine Roeser (2012), ‘Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions’, Risk Analysis 32, 1033–1040

59 Ghosh, Amitav, The Great Derangement: Climate Change and the Unthinkable (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

60 Zwijnenberg, Robert, ‘Biotechnology, Human Dignity and the Importance of Art’, Teoria: Revista di Filosofia (2014), 131–148Google Scholar; Reichle, Ingeborg, Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art (Vienna, New York: Springer, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gessert, George, ‘Notes on the Art of Plant Breeding’, in L'Art Biotech Catalogue (exhibition catalog, Nantes: Le Lieu Unique, 2003), 47Google Scholar.

61 Sleenhoff, Susanne, ‘The Potential of 2.6g 329m/s for Public Engagement with Safety through Biotechnology’, in Essaidi, Jalila (ed.) Bulletproof skin; Exploring Boundaries by Piercing Barriers (Edition: 9789081995702, Publisher: Jalila Essaidi, 2012), 72–79Google Scholar.

62 Roeser, Sabine, Alfano, Veronica & Nevejan, Caroline, ‘The Role of Art in Emotional-Moral Reflection on Risky and Controversial Technologies: The Case of BNCI’, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (2018): 275–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roeser, Sabine ‘Socially extended moral deliberation about risks: a role for emotions and art’, in Carter, J. Adam, Clark, Andy, Kallestrup, Jesper, Palermos, S. Orestis, and Pritchard, Duncan, Socially Extended Epistemology (Oxford: Oxford University, Press 2018)Google Scholar.

63 One of the few philosophers who have published on these topics is Robert Zwijnenberg (cf. Zwijnenberg, R., ‘Preface’, in Reichle, Ingeborg (2009), Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art (Vienna, New York: Springer, 2009), xiii–xxix. Scholars from other disciplines such as cultural studies and media studies have published on what we call ‘techno-art’, but as we argue here, this topic also requires philosophical research. These are some relevant publications from other disciplines: Da Costa, Beatriz and Philip, Kavita (eds), Tactical Biopolitics: Art, Activism, and Technoscience (Cambridge (MA): The MIT Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Ede, Sian, (ed.), Strange and Charmed. Science and the Contemporary Visual Arts, preface by Byatt, A.S. (London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, 2000)Google Scholar; Mehnert, Antonia, Climate Change Fictions (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Munster, Anna, An Aesthesia of Networks: Conjunctive Experience in Art and Technology (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Weichman, John C. (ed.), The Aesthetics of Risk (Zurich: JRP|Ringier books, 2008)Google Scholar; Wilson, Stephen, lnformation Arts: Intersections of Art, Science, and Technology (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

64 Nussbaum, Martha, Upheavals of Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gaut, Berys, Art, Emotion and Ethics (Oxford University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

65 Fredrickson, Barbara L., ‘The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions’, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 359 (2004), 1367–77CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

66 Litman, Jordan, ‘Curiosity and the pleasures of learning: Wanting and liking new information’, Cognition and Emotion 19 (2005), 793–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Noë, Alva, Strange Tools: Art and Human Nature (New York: Hill and Wang, 2015), 102Google Scholar.

68 For more on intentions in the interpretation of (technological) artifacts and the so-called design stance see Vermaas, P., Carrara, M., Borgo, S. and Garbacz, P., ‘The design stance and its artefacts’, Synthese 190 (2013), 1131–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

69 Davies, Stephen, ‘Artists’ intentions and artwork meanings: Some complications’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (2013), 138–39CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Livingston, Paisley, Art and Intention: A Philosophical Study (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tompkins, Jane P., (ed.), Reader-response Criticism: From Formalism to Post-structuralism (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980)Google Scholar.

70 Reichle, Ingeborg, Art in the Age of Technoscience: Genetic Engineering, Robotics, and Artificial Life in Contemporary Art (Vienna, New York: Springer, 2009), 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

71 Hanson, Louise, ‘The Reality of (Non-Aesthetic) Artistic Value’, The Philosophical Quarterly 63 (2013), 492–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lopes, Dominic M., ‘The Myth of (Non-aesthetic) Artistic Value’, The Philosophical Quarterly 61 (2011), 518–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

72 Sauchelli, A., ‘Aesthetic Value, Artistic Value, and Morality’, in Coady, D., Brownlee, K., Lipper-Rasmussen, K. (eds), Blackwell Companion to Applied Philosophy (Malden, Oxford: Blackwell, 2016), 514–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

73 Kieran, Mathew, ‘Art, Morality and Ethics: On the (Im)Moral Character of Art Works and Inter-Relations to Artistic Value’, Philosophy Compass 1 (2006), 129–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

74 Op. cit. note 62, 4.

75 van de Poel, I. and Doorn, N. ‘Ethical Parallel Research: A Network Approach for Moral Evaluation’, in Doorn, N., Schuurbiers, D., van de Poel, I., Gorman, M. (eds) Early engagement and new technologies: Opening up the laboratory (Dordrecht: Springer, 2013)Google Scholar.

76 Work for this article has been funded by the project ‘Developing socially responsible innovations: The role of values and moral emotions’ funded by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO), programme Responsible Innovation; project number: MVI-14-048.