ENGR 482 Exam 3 Solution Manual Fully Solved Latest Update 2025 Graded A+
T/F: According to the "Common Sense View," technological artifacts take on moral properties when used
for good or evil by humans. - Answers False- this view is that artifacts have no moral properties in
themselves.
T/F: The difference b/w the "Common Sense" and "Strong" views toward the morality of technological
artifacts is a matter of the degree to which people blame artifacts for immoral actions. - Answers False-
there is a fundamental difference b/w the views regarding whether artifacts can be held morally
responsible for certain actions.
Why are Robert Moses' architectural designs indicative of Langdon Winner's view of the moral
properties of artifacts (the "Strong View")? - Answers Moral values are built into his designs, which come
to embody these values.
T/F: Bruno Latour, reflecting the "Strong View" toward technological artifacts, believed artifacts are
morally considerable because they work as actants alongside human beings in a responsible network. -
Answers True
What does Martin Heidegger say often happens w/ tools as they are used? - Answers -They become
invisible b/c the user's focus is on the task at hand
-They are noticed when they don't function as designed
What is meant by Don Ihde's term "multi-usability"? - Answers An artifact can be used in different ways
based on each user's intentions.
Bruno Latour's "script" of a thing - Answers The behaviors that the artifact invites or inhibits its user to
perform
Don Ihde's "technological intentionality" - Answers Technology "shades" how we see the world,
emphasizing some things at the expense of others.
Technological Optimist - Answers "on the whole, technology is for the better"
Technological Pessimist - Answers "on the whole, technology is for the worst"
Technological Determinism - Answers Technology precedes its own logic; we can't do anything to stop
its progress
Critical Approach to Technology - Answers A check on the Enlightenment spirit; analogous to the food
critic
Artifact - Answers Any object intentionally created by humans
Common Sense View - Answers -Can't blame the artifact for a wrongdoing
, -Humans made objects as mere tools/neutral means to an end
-Objects have no moral properties
-We ascribe right or wrong (good or bad) to humans and their actions
Strong View (Latour) - Answers -"morality is inside the things"; artifacts DO have moral properties
-Actor-Network Theory (ANT)
-Attributes moral relevance to artifacts whose existence perpetuates moral values
-Believe some combo of subject and object should be though of as one and the same entity
Actor-Network Theory (ANT) - Answers -Objects serve as "actors" or "actants"
-Not possible to uphold the boundary b/w humans and artifacts
Strong View (Winner) - Answers -Objects "embody a systematic social inequality" that becomes "part of
the social landscape"
-Example of Robert Moses' designs
-Therefore, artifacts embody morality
Strong View (Verbeek) - Answers -"Moral agency is distributed over both humans and technological
artifacts"
-Humans and artifacts don't have separate existence anymore
-Many artifacts blur this distinction from subject
-Moral agencies should be ascribed to hybrid entities of both subjects and objects
Moderate View - Answers -Technological artifacts can't be part of a moral agent/subject and can't be
responsible
-However, artifacts have high moral relevance in ethics b/c they create new options for action
-Artifacts have moral relevance, but aren't morally responsible or accountable for their effects
Mediating Technology - Answers Mediate experiences b/w object and subject
Ex.) The use of an x-ray machine to view a broken bone
Embodiment Relationship - Answers Objects serve as extension of the body of the user
Ex.) Use of a cane by a blind person
T/F: According to the "Common Sense View," technological artifacts take on moral properties when used
for good or evil by humans. - Answers False- this view is that artifacts have no moral properties in
themselves.
T/F: The difference b/w the "Common Sense" and "Strong" views toward the morality of technological
artifacts is a matter of the degree to which people blame artifacts for immoral actions. - Answers False-
there is a fundamental difference b/w the views regarding whether artifacts can be held morally
responsible for certain actions.
Why are Robert Moses' architectural designs indicative of Langdon Winner's view of the moral
properties of artifacts (the "Strong View")? - Answers Moral values are built into his designs, which come
to embody these values.
T/F: Bruno Latour, reflecting the "Strong View" toward technological artifacts, believed artifacts are
morally considerable because they work as actants alongside human beings in a responsible network. -
Answers True
What does Martin Heidegger say often happens w/ tools as they are used? - Answers -They become
invisible b/c the user's focus is on the task at hand
-They are noticed when they don't function as designed
What is meant by Don Ihde's term "multi-usability"? - Answers An artifact can be used in different ways
based on each user's intentions.
Bruno Latour's "script" of a thing - Answers The behaviors that the artifact invites or inhibits its user to
perform
Don Ihde's "technological intentionality" - Answers Technology "shades" how we see the world,
emphasizing some things at the expense of others.
Technological Optimist - Answers "on the whole, technology is for the better"
Technological Pessimist - Answers "on the whole, technology is for the worst"
Technological Determinism - Answers Technology precedes its own logic; we can't do anything to stop
its progress
Critical Approach to Technology - Answers A check on the Enlightenment spirit; analogous to the food
critic
Artifact - Answers Any object intentionally created by humans
Common Sense View - Answers -Can't blame the artifact for a wrongdoing
, -Humans made objects as mere tools/neutral means to an end
-Objects have no moral properties
-We ascribe right or wrong (good or bad) to humans and their actions
Strong View (Latour) - Answers -"morality is inside the things"; artifacts DO have moral properties
-Actor-Network Theory (ANT)
-Attributes moral relevance to artifacts whose existence perpetuates moral values
-Believe some combo of subject and object should be though of as one and the same entity
Actor-Network Theory (ANT) - Answers -Objects serve as "actors" or "actants"
-Not possible to uphold the boundary b/w humans and artifacts
Strong View (Winner) - Answers -Objects "embody a systematic social inequality" that becomes "part of
the social landscape"
-Example of Robert Moses' designs
-Therefore, artifacts embody morality
Strong View (Verbeek) - Answers -"Moral agency is distributed over both humans and technological
artifacts"
-Humans and artifacts don't have separate existence anymore
-Many artifacts blur this distinction from subject
-Moral agencies should be ascribed to hybrid entities of both subjects and objects
Moderate View - Answers -Technological artifacts can't be part of a moral agent/subject and can't be
responsible
-However, artifacts have high moral relevance in ethics b/c they create new options for action
-Artifacts have moral relevance, but aren't morally responsible or accountable for their effects
Mediating Technology - Answers Mediate experiences b/w object and subject
Ex.) The use of an x-ray machine to view a broken bone
Embodiment Relationship - Answers Objects serve as extension of the body of the user
Ex.) Use of a cane by a blind person
