Abstract
Leo Strauss’s political philosophy spurs recognition that (i) an adequate political philosophy of technology must be able to integrate domestic and geopolitical ideals that are often expressed separately; (ii) technologies alter the formation of publics around issues, which depend less on the traditional overlap between people and place, so the political concept of sovereignty must be reconsidered; and (iii) both the polis and its technologies lift individuals beyond themselves, so a political philosophy of technology must include an aspirational element: the technologies we make, use, and maintain are expressions of our interests, values, and concerns.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data Availability
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. This paper thus contains no experimental research data.
Notes
An overview of Strauss’s understanding of ‘political philosophy’, ‘political thought’, and ‘political theory’ can be found in Carl Mitcham’s “Political Philosophy of Technology: After Leo Strauss” (in [2]), where Mitcham develops a substantially different line of argument from what is made in this issue [3]. Both of Mitcham's papers inform my response.
References
Strauss L (1959) What is political philosophy? In: What is political philosophy? and other studies. University of Chicago Press
Miller G, Jerónimo HM, Qin Zhu (eds) (forthcoming) Thinking through science and technology: Philosophy, religion, and politics in an engineered world. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD
Mitcham C (2022) Political philosophy of technology: After Leo Strauss (A question of sovereignty). Nanoethics; https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-022-00428-9
Lloyd HA (1991) Sovereignty: Bodin, Hobbes, Rousseau. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 45(179(4)):353–379
Dewey J (1927) The public and its problems. Holt, New York
Ogburn WF (1922) Social change: With respect to culture and original nature. B. W. Huebsch, New York
Miller G, Portal M, Xu Xin (forthcoming) Engineering myth in China and the United States. In: Christensen SH, Buch A, Conlon E, Didier C, Mitcham C, Murphy M (eds) Engineering, social sciences, and the humanities: have their conversations come of age? Springer, Dordrecht
Bellah RN (1967) Civil religion in America. Daedalus 96(1):1–21
Acknowledgements
This paper benefited from Moriah Poliakoff’s comments on a previous draft.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Miller, G. Toward a More Expansive Political Philosophy of Technology. Nanoethics 16, 347–349 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-022-00433-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-022-00433-y