The philosophy of science and technology and the dialectics of nature enjoy a profound historical origin. The spread and development of dialectics of nature in China have created conditions for discipline institutionalization of the philosophy of science and technology in China. Gradually reaching maturity in the course of reform and opening up, this discipline serves as an important provider of new thinking about China’s social development and a participant in China’s social changes. So far, it has become one of the disciplines with a farreaching impact on contemporary Chinese society and thought. This paper aims at providing a brief and vivid presentation of the history and present situation of Chinese philosophy of science and technology, its development in China, its norms and pluralism as a second-level discipline of philosophy, and some existing problems.
The philosophical study of Artificial Intelligence (AI) holds immense importance as it delves into the latest advancements and applications of AI from a philosophical standpoint. This study serves multiple purposes: First, it contributes to the expansion and deepening of philosophical study. Second, it plays a crucial role in establishing ethical guidelines and cultural boundaries for regulating AI in conjunction with relevant scientific and technological ethics. Third, it holds historical significance in shaping future AI development strategies. The philosophical study of AI should underline ontology, epistemology, axiology and ethics, etc. In the future, it is essential to carefully consider the relationship between AI and human development, the significance of sci-tech and social reforms resulting from AI, the achievement and evaluation of singularity, the applied integration of AI in social epistemology, as well as technological applications and social issues arising from AI.
In the modern era, both philosophy for children and philosophy of Artificial Intelligence (AI) are emerging as novel realms of philosophical inquiry. If AI seeks to emulate human intelligence, merely considering general human intelligence falls short; instead, focused attention must be directed towards child intelligence. Comprehensive inquiries into philosophy for children and child intelligence are likely to offer a novel perspective on AI research. This perspective examines the intersections of philosophy for children and AI across three distinct dimensions: cognitive features, learning styles, and autonomy criteria for intelligent entities. This paper posits that both children and machines represent authentic intelligent agents, and their advancement is contingent upon continuous learning. The primary objective of this paper is to facilitate a critical examination of and diversification in AI research methodologies, primarily by elucidating the pedagogical frameworks of philosophy for children across three dimensions. Furthermore, this paper endeavors to offer a fresh perspective on the study and practical implementation of philosophy for children.
Reflection on the nature and role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology in the field of literary and artistic production can contribute to understanding the “subject” issue of AI and clarify the ideological origin of the AI threat theory. First of all, from the perspective of the producers of AI literature and art, AI conforms to the characteristics of modern “agents” and can constitute the “actor-network” in art together with human beings. The emergence of AI has become a technological opportunity to challenge traditional anthropocentrism and subjectcentered thought. Secondly, viewing from the production mode of AI literature and art, art has entered the era of AI simulation, where AI has accelerated the intelligent development of the cultural industry, and the judgment of “true or false” is the basic judgment in AI art. Artificial intelligence has put an end to certain art categories rather than the whole human art, and we should cherish the non-capitalized form of art production. Lastly, AI literary and artistic production reflects the integration of technology into art. AI should be strictly limited to the field of production, which guards against the capital’s control over technology and machinery, prevents the abuse and excessive autonomy of AI technology, and guides the harmonization of technology and art with aesthetic reason.
The concept of moralizing technology within the Dutch School has gained increasing attention in technology philosophy and applied ethics, thus making it of crucial significance to further explore its implications in the context of science and technology ethics. Moralizing technology refers to the embedment of values into technology and the application of moral principles in the design and use of technology. This concept has led to some misunderstandings within the academic circle. Therefore, it remains of vital importance to clarify its core principles and implications. More specifically, it is important to note that moralizing technology should not be mistaken for the alienation of morality, nor does it deprive the subjectivity of human beings. In addition, moralizing technology does not involve the study of moral philosophy in the strict sense. On the contrary, it comprises two main aspects: the descriptive and practical aspects. The descriptive aspect of moralizing technology theory draws directly from the relational ontology perspective within post-phenomenology, while the practical aspect of the theory can be regarded as the applied ethics outcomes derived from the aforementioned ontological perspective. As a concept within science and technology ethics, moralizing technology embraces the theory of the coconstruction of humans and technology. Furthermore, it maintains a sensitivity to the embedded value attributes of the technology. The theory considers ethics as a constituting element of scientific and technological practice and thus contributes to the active development of technology products that align with ethical expectations. Moreover, moralizing technology emphasizes the significance of cultivating citizens’ scientific and technological literacy, aiming to encourage diverse stakeholders to actively participate in activities concerning technology.
This study selects the science and technology-themed papers between 2000 and 2020 from five high-quality philosophical journals within the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) database. Through the quantitative and visual processing of CiteSpace and the analysis of literature content, it is found that since the 21st century, the philosophical study of science and technology has made comprehensive advancements in science, technology and humanities, science, technology and nature, science, technology and society, and the theoretical interpretation and discipline construction of the philosophy of science and technology. Moreover, these advancements have given rise to a distinctive Chinese research paradigm, forging unique trajectories of the discipline and fostering collaborative research groups. The philosophical study of science and technology is firmly rooted in the fabric of real-life experience intricately linked to the national context. It has gone through the transformation from theoretical research to practical exploration, and holds both theoretical and practical value. Meanwhile, the conceptual boundaries of science and technology have branched into various fields, including information philosophy, industry philosophy, and biological philosophy, signifying a more profound, concrete, extensive, and farreaching exploration of the subject.
It has been over one hundred years since the establishment of the modern scientific and technological system during the Republic of China period. It is necessary to reflect on the historical traces of scientific and technological transition in China as a whole. During this period, the scientific and technological culture showed a high degree of consistency, characterized by continuous catching-up and consistency-based technological imitation and independent innovation. The scientific and technological transition in China over the past century was characterized by locality instead of Western centrism in the philosophical sense of scientific practice. It is the scientific and technological development path with Chinese characteristics. Due to the long-term and continuous influences of external environment such as national will, traditional culture, pragmatism, and social and historical conditions, the social history for scientific and technological development showcased certain inseparability.