The leading question of this paper is: Where does the normativity of the ethics of science and technology come from? This is a challenging question given that the traditional reservoirs of convenience (like metaphysical universalism) are no longer at our disposal the way they used to be. The paper is divided into eight sections: (1) It is specified what challenges a non-foundationalist justification and normativity has to meet. (2) A three-dimensional conception of responsibility is developed based on the human triangular I–We–World relations. (3) The concepts of bounded responsibility and bounded ethics of science and technology are formulated. (4) The principle of reflective equilibrium is introduced as a principle of rationality, and it is shown how this principle generates rational and reasonable justifications in the ethics of science and technology. (5) Against this background, a reconception of internal and external responsibilities of science is given. (6) The type of responsibility demanded is exemplified by today’s climate research. (7) The paper argues for a hand-in-hand model of uncertainties in the sciences and for ethical obligations to preserve the conditions of human life on earth. The ethical argument is spelled out in terms of ethical care, preservation, and precaution. (8) Additionally, some arguments are developed to answer the question of why it is reasonable at all to preserve human life on earth.

中文翻译：

---

有限责任与有限科技伦理

本文的主导问题是：科技伦理的规范性从何而来？鉴于传统的便利储库（如形而上学普遍主义）不再像过去那样可供我们使用，这是一个具有挑战性的问题。该论文分为八个部分：（1）具体说明了非基础主义的正当性和规范性必须面对的挑战。(2) 基于人类三角关系的我-我们-世界关系发展了三维责任概念。(3)制定了有限责任和有限科技伦理的概念。(4) 引入反射均衡原理作为合理性原理，并展示了这一原则如何在科学技术伦理中产生合理合理的理由。(5) 在此背景下，重新认识了科学的内外部责任。(6) 所要求的责任类型以今天的气候研究为例。(7) 该论文主张建立一个科学不确定性的手拉手模型，并主张保护地球上人类生活条件的伦理义务。道德论点是在道德关怀、保护和预防方面阐明的。(8) 此外，还提出了一些论据来回答为什么在地球上保护人类生命是合理的问题。(6) 所要求的责任类型以今天的气候研究为例。(7) 该论文主张建立一个科学不确定性的手拉手模型，并主张保护地球上人类生活条件的伦理义务。道德论点是在道德关怀、保护和预防方面阐明的。(8) 此外，还提出了一些论据来回答为什么在地球上保护人类生命是合理的问题。(6) 所要求的责任类型以今天的气候研究为例。(7) 该论文主张建立一个科学不确定性的手拉手模型，并主张保护地球上人类生活条件的伦理义务。道德论点是在道德关怀、保护和预防方面阐明的。(8) 此外，还提出了一些论据来回答为什么在地球上保护人类生命是合理的问题。