Ethics in design: Pluralism and the case for justice in inclusive design
The growing recognition of ethics' relevance to design fuelled the development of ethics- and value-centred design approaches. Despite their potential to address ethics in design proactively, they are criticized for failing to clarify their goals and explicate their theoretical basis. Since any...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Tagungsbericht |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 97 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 86 |
container_title | |
container_volume | |
creator | Bianchin, Matteo Heylighen, Ann |
description | The growing recognition of ethics' relevance to design fuelled the development of ethics- and value-centred design approaches. Despite their potential to address ethics in design proactively, they are criticized for failing to clarify their goals and explicate their theoretical basis. Since any ethical theory recruited in design must take seriously the fact of pluralism, only principle-based normative theories - as contrasted with value-based theories - seem fit. We explore what such a principle-based approach might look like in the context of inclusive design, where the issue of pluralism gives rise to an apparent paradox between the aim of designing for the widest possible audience and that of taking difference seriously. We show how this paradox can be addressed by applying John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness. In addition, we demonstrate that, without being explicated, elements of this theory are at work in existing inclusive design techniques, be it not always consistently. In doing so, we seek to contribute to a general framework for addressing the challenges
related to ethics in design. |
format | Conference Proceeding |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>kuleuven_FZOIL</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_kuleuven_dspace_123456789_617742</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>123456789_617742</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-kuleuven_dspace_123456789_6177423</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVy70OgjAUQOEOOhD1He7mYBhokR9Xg2F0cG-acpGrtRpuS3x8Y8ID6HSW7yxEIlVdpSpTMhFtEwayDOShQ6arP8DZxdE44gcY30EYEKxhhP45wi1yIItfTd66yDTh_K3FsjeOcTN3Jban5nJs03t0GCf0uuOXsagzqfJ9UVa1LrKyzKX6R-5-kzq8g_oAp8hGzA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Institutional Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype></control><display><type>conference_proceeding</type><title>Ethics in design: Pluralism and the case for justice in inclusive design</title><source>Lirias (KU Leuven Association)</source><creator>Bianchin, Matteo ; Heylighen, Ann</creator><contributor>Storni, Cristiano ; McMahon, Muireann ; Lloyd, Peter ; Leahy, Keelin ; Bohemia, Erik</contributor><creatorcontrib>Bianchin, Matteo ; Heylighen, Ann ; Storni, Cristiano ; McMahon, Muireann ; Lloyd, Peter ; Leahy, Keelin ; Bohemia, Erik</creatorcontrib><description>The growing recognition of ethics' relevance to design fuelled the development of ethics- and value-centred design approaches. Despite their potential to address ethics in design proactively, they are criticized for failing to clarify their goals and explicate their theoretical basis. Since any ethical theory recruited in design must take seriously the fact of pluralism, only principle-based normative theories - as contrasted with value-based theories - seem fit. We explore what such a principle-based approach might look like in the context of inclusive design, where the issue of pluralism gives rise to an apparent paradox between the aim of designing for the widest possible audience and that of taking difference seriously. We show how this paradox can be addressed by applying John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness. In addition, we demonstrate that, without being explicated, elements of this theory are at work in existing inclusive design techniques, be it not always consistently. In doing so, we seek to contribute to a general framework for addressing the challenges
related to ethics in design.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2398-3132</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Design Research Society</publisher><ispartof>Proceedings of DRS2018 - Design as a catalyst for change, 2018, p.86-97</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>309,310,315,776,25118,27837</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://lirias.kuleuven.be/handle/123456789/617742$$EView_record_in_KU_Leuven_Association$$FView_record_in_$$GKU_Leuven_Association</linktorsrc></links><search><contributor>Storni, Cristiano</contributor><contributor>McMahon, Muireann</contributor><contributor>Lloyd, Peter</contributor><contributor>Leahy, Keelin</contributor><contributor>Bohemia, Erik</contributor><creatorcontrib>Bianchin, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heylighen, Ann</creatorcontrib><title>Ethics in design: Pluralism and the case for justice in inclusive design</title><title>Proceedings of DRS2018 - Design as a catalyst for change</title><description>The growing recognition of ethics' relevance to design fuelled the development of ethics- and value-centred design approaches. Despite their potential to address ethics in design proactively, they are criticized for failing to clarify their goals and explicate their theoretical basis. Since any ethical theory recruited in design must take seriously the fact of pluralism, only principle-based normative theories - as contrasted with value-based theories - seem fit. We explore what such a principle-based approach might look like in the context of inclusive design, where the issue of pluralism gives rise to an apparent paradox between the aim of designing for the widest possible audience and that of taking difference seriously. We show how this paradox can be addressed by applying John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness. In addition, we demonstrate that, without being explicated, elements of this theory are at work in existing inclusive design techniques, be it not always consistently. In doing so, we seek to contribute to a general framework for addressing the challenges
related to ethics in design.</description><issn>2398-3132</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>conference_proceeding</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>conference_proceeding</recordtype><sourceid>FZOIL</sourceid><recordid>eNqVy70OgjAUQOEOOhD1He7mYBhokR9Xg2F0cG-acpGrtRpuS3x8Y8ID6HSW7yxEIlVdpSpTMhFtEwayDOShQ6arP8DZxdE44gcY30EYEKxhhP45wi1yIItfTd66yDTh_K3FsjeOcTN3Jban5nJs03t0GCf0uuOXsagzqfJ9UVa1LrKyzKX6R-5-kzq8g_oAp8hGzA</recordid><startdate>20180625</startdate><enddate>20180625</enddate><creator>Bianchin, Matteo</creator><creator>Heylighen, Ann</creator><general>Design Research Society</general><scope>FZOIL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20180625</creationdate><title>Ethics in design: Pluralism and the case for justice in inclusive design</title><author>Bianchin, Matteo ; Heylighen, Ann</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-kuleuven_dspace_123456789_6177423</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>conference_proceedings</rsrctype><prefilter>conference_proceedings</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bianchin, Matteo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heylighen, Ann</creatorcontrib><collection>Lirias (KU Leuven Association)</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bianchin, Matteo</au><au>Heylighen, Ann</au><au>Storni, Cristiano</au><au>McMahon, Muireann</au><au>Lloyd, Peter</au><au>Leahy, Keelin</au><au>Bohemia, Erik</au><format>book</format><genre>proceeding</genre><ristype>CONF</ristype><atitle>Ethics in design: Pluralism and the case for justice in inclusive design</atitle><btitle>Proceedings of DRS2018 - Design as a catalyst for change</btitle><date>2018-06-25</date><risdate>2018</risdate><spage>86</spage><epage>97</epage><pages>86-97</pages><issn>2398-3132</issn><abstract>The growing recognition of ethics' relevance to design fuelled the development of ethics- and value-centred design approaches. Despite their potential to address ethics in design proactively, they are criticized for failing to clarify their goals and explicate their theoretical basis. Since any ethical theory recruited in design must take seriously the fact of pluralism, only principle-based normative theories - as contrasted with value-based theories - seem fit. We explore what such a principle-based approach might look like in the context of inclusive design, where the issue of pluralism gives rise to an apparent paradox between the aim of designing for the widest possible audience and that of taking difference seriously. We show how this paradox can be addressed by applying John Rawls' theory of justice as fairness. In addition, we demonstrate that, without being explicated, elements of this theory are at work in existing inclusive design techniques, be it not always consistently. In doing so, we seek to contribute to a general framework for addressing the challenges
related to ethics in design.</abstract><pub>Design Research Society</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 2398-3132 |
ispartof | Proceedings of DRS2018 - Design as a catalyst for change, 2018, p.86-97 |
issn | 2398-3132 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_kuleuven_dspace_123456789_617742 |
source | Lirias (KU Leuven Association) |
title | Ethics in design: Pluralism and the case for justice in inclusive design |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T21%3A25%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-kuleuven_FZOIL&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=proceeding&rft.atitle=Ethics%20in%20design:%20Pluralism%20and%20the%20case%20for%20justice%20in%20inclusive%20design&rft.btitle=Proceedings%20of%20DRS2018%20-%20Design%20as%20a%20catalyst%20for%20change&rft.au=Bianchin,%20Matteo&rft.date=2018-06-25&rft.spage=86&rft.epage=97&rft.pages=86-97&rft.issn=2398-3132&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Ckuleuven_FZOIL%3E123456789_617742%3C/kuleuven_FZOIL%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |