Design expresses and shapes human values, either with intention or by default. In their recent book, Value Sensitive Design: Shaping Technology with Moral Imagination, Batya Friedman and David G. Hendry, who both teach in the Information School at the University of Washington and who are members of the Value Sensitive Design Research Lab, which Friedman directs, call for foregrounding human values in process and product. They define the field of “value sensitive design” as one that seeks to guide how we live with technology, offering “theory, method, and practice to account for human values in a principled and systematic manner throughout the technical design process” (4). Both descriptive and prescriptive, they outline major projects that have shaped the field since it was established in the 1990s and offer recommendations for designers. They claim the reigns as the stewards of the field, both defending how they’ve named it and describing what it encompasses. In the first of the book’s five chapters, the authors argue that “all technologies to some degree reflect, and reciprocally affect, human values,” and that “in designing tools we are designing ways of being” (1). They call for designers to take an explicit ethical position as shapers of human experience and translators of value. Of course, the question of what values and whose values comes up quickly for the reader. The authors define human values as “what is important to people in their lives” (24) emphasizing well-being, dignity, and justice while at the same time allowing for the idea that values are often context dependent. This is demonstrated in the projects they highlight, such as one focusing on improving transit for people with disabilities, and another that uses software to model the long-term results of zoning and land-use scenarios. All of the featured projects are altruistic, optimistic, and open ended, but Friedman and Hendry acknowledge critiques that question notions of universal values, and the difficulties of distinguishing between designer and stakeholder values. The second chapter lays out the theory of value sensitive design through a defense of terms and a list of commitments. For example, by using the term “sensitive” rather than “centered,” they recognize a way of working within a larger design process. The commitments are constitutive; they both describe and help construct the field. For example, in its expanded conception of stakeholders, value sensitive design goes beyond direct stakeholders—who we often call Saraleah Fordyce is Adjunct Faculty in Critical Studies and MFA Design at California College of the Arts. sfordyce@cca.edu © 2019 Saraleah Fordyce DOI: 10.1080/ 17547075.2019.1684698

中文翻译：

---

价值敏感设计：用道德想象塑造技术

设计表达和塑造人类价值观，无论是有意还是默认。Batya Friedman 和 David G. Hendry 在他们最近的着作《价值敏感设计：用道德想象塑造技术》中，他们都在华盛顿大学信息学院任教，并且是弗里德曼指导的价值敏感设计研究实验室的成员，呼吁在过程和产品中突出人类价值。他们将“价值敏感设计”领域定义为旨在指导我们如何使用技术的领域，提供“在整个技术设计过程中以原则和系统的方式解释人类价值的理论、方法和实践”（4） . 无论是描述性的还是规范性的，它们都概述了自 1990 年代成立以来塑造该领域的主要项目，并为设计师提供了建议。他们声称这些统治者是该领域的管理者，既捍卫了他们如何命名它，又描述了它所包含的内容。在本书五章的第一章中，作者认为“所有技术都在某种程度上反映并相互影响人类价值观”，并且“在设计工具时，我们正在设计存在方式”(1)。他们呼吁设计师采取明确的道德立场，作为人类经验的塑造者和价值的翻译者。当然，读者很快就会想到什么值和谁的值的问题。作者将人类价值观定义为“对人们生活中重要的东西”（24），强调福祉、尊严和正义，同时考虑到价值观通常取决于上下文的观点。这在他们强调的项目中得到了证明，例如，一个专注于改善残疾人交通，另一个使用软件来模拟分区和土地使用场景的长期结果。所有特色项目都是无私的、乐观的和开放式的，但弗里德曼和亨德利承认质疑普世价值观念的批评，以及区分设计师和利益相关者价值观的困难。第二章通过对术语的辩护和承诺清单来阐述价值敏感设计的理论。例如，通过使用术语“敏感”而不是“集中”，他们认识到在更大的设计过程中工作的一种方式。承诺是构成性的；它们都描述并帮助构建了该领域。例如，在其扩大的利益相关者概念中，价值敏感的设计超越了直接的利益相关者——我们通常称之为 Saraleah Fordyce 是加州艺术学院批判研究和 MFA 设计的兼职教师。sfordyce@cca.edu © 2019 Saraleah Fordyce DOI：10.1080/ 17547075.2019.1684698