Technology and the Virtues
By:Shannon Vallor
Published on 2016-08-02 by Oxford University Press
The 21st century offers a dizzying array of new technological developments: robots smart enough to take white collar jobs, social media tools that manage our most important relationships, ordinary objects that track, record, analyze and share every detail of our daily lives, and biomedical techniques with the potential to transform and enhance human minds and bodies to an unprecedented degree. Emerging technologies are reshaping our habits, practices, institutions, cultures and environments in increasingly rapid, complex and unpredictable ways that create profound risks and opportunities for human flourishing on a global scale. How can our future be protected in such challenging and uncertain conditions? How can we possibly improve the chances that the human family will not only live, but live well, into the 21st century and beyond? This book locates a key to that future in the distant past: specifically, in the philosophical traditions of virtue ethics developed by classical thinkers from Aristotle and Confucius to the Buddha. Each developed a way of seeking the good life that equips human beings with the moral and intellectual character to flourish even in the most unpredictable, complex and unstable situations--precisely where we find ourselves today. Through an examination of the many risks and opportunities presented by rapidly changing technosocial conditions, Vallor makes the case that if we are to have any real hope of securing a future worth wanting, then we will need more than just better technologies. We will also need better humans. Technology and the Virtues develops a practical framework for seeking that goal by means of the deliberate cultivation of technomoral virtues: specific skills and strengths of character, adapted to the unique challenges of 21st century life, that offer the human family our best chance of learning to live wisely and well with emerging technologies.
This Book was ranked at 12 by Google Books for keyword technology.
Book ID of Technology and the Virtues's Books is D3PADAAAQBAJ, Book which was written byShannon Vallorhave ETAG "gvbvWNoMoEM"
Book which was published by Oxford University Press since 2016-08-02 have ISBNs, ISBN 13 Code is 9780190498528 and ISBN 10 Code is 0190498528
Reading Mode in Text Status is false and Reading Mode in Image Status is true
Book which have "368 Pages" is Printed at BOOK under CategoryPhilosophy
This Book was rated by Raters and have average rate at ""
This eBook Maturity (Adult Book) status is NOT_MATURE
Book was written in en
eBook Version Availability Status at PDF is true and in ePub is false
Book Preview
Don't you type of hate how we've entered the decadent period of Goodreads where possibly fifty % (or more) of the evaluations published by non-teenagers and non-romancers are now bare and unabashed in their variously successful efforts at being arch, wry, meta, parodic, confessional, and/or snarky? Don't you kind of maple (secretly, in the marrow of your gut's merry druthers) for the nice ol'times of Goodreads (known then as GodFearingGoodlyReading.com) when all evaluations were uniformly plainspoke Do not you type of hate how we've joined the decadent stage of Goodreads where possibly fifty % (or more) of the reviews published by non-teenagers and non-romancers are now actually nude and unabashed in their variously powerful attempts at being arch, wry, meta, parodic, confessional, and/or snarky? Don't you type of pine (secretly, in the marrow of your gut's merry druthers) for the nice ol'times of Goodreads (known then as GodFearingGoodlyReading.com) when all reviews were uniformly plainspoken, only effective, unpretentious, and -- most importantly else -- boring, boring, boring? Don't you kind of hate when people state'don't you think this way or feel this way'in an attempt to goad you both psychologically and grammatically into accepting using them? In the language of ABBA: I actually do, I really do, I do(, I actually do, I do). Effectively, since the interwebs is just a earth by which the past stands shoulder-to-shoulder with today's (and with fetish porn), we can review yesteryear in its inviolable presentness anytime we wish. Or at the very least until this site ultimately tanks. Contemplate (won't you?) Matt Nieberle's review of Macbeth in its entirety. I've bound it with huge string and pulled it here for your perusal. (Please recognize that several a sic are recommended in the next reviews.) their actually complex and foolish! why cant we be studying like Romeo and Juliet?!?! at least that book is great! There you've it. Refreshingly, not just a evaluation published in one of the witch's sounds or alluding to Hillary and Bill Clinton or discussing the reviewer's first period. Only a primal yell unleashed into the black wilderness of the cosmos.Yes, Mr. Nieberle is (probably) a teen, but I admire his power to strongarm the temptation to be clever or ironic. (Don't you?) He speaks the native language of the idk generation with an economy and a quality that renders his convictions much more emphatic. Here's MICHAEL's report on exactly the same play. You could'know'MICHAEL; he's the'Problems Architect'at Goodreads. (A problematic title itself in so it implies that he designs problems... which can be the case, for many I know.) This book shouldn't be required reading... reading plays that you don't want to read is awful. Reading a play kinda sucks to start with, if it was meant to be read, then it would have been a novel, not just a play. Along with that the teach had us students see the play aloud (on person for each character for a few pages). None people had browse the play before. None folks wanted to see it (I made the mistake of taking the'easy'english class for 6 years). The teacher picked students that appeared to be they weren't paying attention. All of this compounded to make me virtually hate reading classics for something similar to 10 years (granted macbeth alone wasn't the problem). I also hate iambic pentameter. Pure activism there. STOP the mandatory reading of plays. It's wrong, morally and academically. Plus it can definitely fuck up your GPA. There's no wasteful extravagance in this editorial... no fanfare, no fireworks, no linked photos of half-naked, oiled-up, big-bosomed starlets, no invented dialogues between mcdougal and the review-writer. It's simple and memorable. Being required to see plays is wrong, and in the event that you require anyone, under duress, to read a play then you definitely have sinned and are likely to hell, if you believe in hell. If not, you're likely to the DMV. I am also tired of whatever you smug spelling snobs. You damnable fascists together with your new-fangled dictionaries and your fancy-schmancy spell check. Sometimes the passionate immediacy of an email overcomes its spelling limitations. Also, in this age when we are taught to respect each other's differences, this indicates offensively egocentric and mean-spirited to anticipate others tokowtow in your petty linguistic rules. Imaginative term is going to no cost itself however you try to be able to shackle it. That is your current cue, Aubrey. Within this opinion, the have fun with Macbeth ended up being the worste peice possibly created by Shakespeare, this also is saying quite a lot contemplating furthermore understand his or her Romeo plus Juliet. Ontop associated with it truly is witout a doubt fantastic story, naive figures as well as absolutly discusting list of morals, Shakespeare openly portrays Lady Macbeth because true vilian while in the play. Looking at she is mearly the actual speech around the trunk game as well as Macbeth themselves is usually truely carrying out a gruesome offenses, such as murder and fraudulence, I would not discover why it's so uncomplicated to visualize this Macbeth would likely be inclined to accomplish superior as an alternative to evil if perhaps his / her partner ended up being more possitive. I really believe that enjoy is actually uterally unrealistic. But the examples below is a ne furthermore extremely with basic book reviewing. Although succinct plus without the stealing attention trend so that you can coyness or cuteness, Jo's review alludes to the anger therefore unique that it is inexpressible. One particular imagines a handful of Signet Timeless Designs compromised to bits having pruning shears throughout Jo's vicinity. I don't really like this particular play. So much in fact that I can't actually provide you with almost any analogies as well as similes in respect of the amount of I hate it. A incrementally snarkier variety may have stated a little something like...'I hate this particular engage in just like a simile I won't come up with.' Never Jo. The lady articulates your live, undecorated truth of the matter unsuitable with regard to figurative language. And also there's certainly nothing wrong with that. The moment within an awesome while, when you buy neck-deep throughout dandified pomo hijinks, it really is a pleasant wallow while in the pig put in writing you happen to be itchin'for. Thank you so much, Jo. I enjoy you and your futile learning at similes which can't approach the bilious hatred in the heart. That you are mine, as well as I'm yours. Figuratively talking, connected with course. And after this this is our assessment: Macbeth by Bill Shakespeare is the better fictional operate inside the Language language, along with anybody who disagrees can be an asshole and also a dumbhead.
Comments
Post a Comment