<p>Kenneth Waltz argued that more states should have nuclear weapons. This remains a controversial position in international relations theory, while in philosophy of technology, it is largely unknown. This is regrettable, because Waltz offers interesting arguments for why nuclear weapons have a positive influence on the world. In short, he implies that nuclear weapons contain morally desirable values. Because of this, Waltz should be a more prominent voice in philosophy of technology, especially in the debate on the values embedded in technological artifacts. Waltz offers a convincing account for why nuclear weapons are not value-neutral, and I argue that his works imply a strong version of this position: that nuclear weapons co-act together with humans. The paper will outline and defend this position. However, I note that Waltz’s analysis is narrowly focused on international relations. For him, nuclear weapons are good because they foster peace. Philosophy of technology should expand on this thesis. To integrate Waltz into the field, scholars should interrogate the benefits and drawbacks of nuclear weapons based on a variety of values – including, but not limited to, those that Waltz proposes. Value neutrality thesis; nuclear weapons: international relations; history of ideas; ethics of technology.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Cheering for the Bomb? On the Moral Values of Nuclear Weapons

  • Michael Haiden

摘要

Kenneth Waltz argued that more states should have nuclear weapons. This remains a controversial position in international relations theory, while in philosophy of technology, it is largely unknown. This is regrettable, because Waltz offers interesting arguments for why nuclear weapons have a positive influence on the world. In short, he implies that nuclear weapons contain morally desirable values. Because of this, Waltz should be a more prominent voice in philosophy of technology, especially in the debate on the values embedded in technological artifacts. Waltz offers a convincing account for why nuclear weapons are not value-neutral, and I argue that his works imply a strong version of this position: that nuclear weapons co-act together with humans. The paper will outline and defend this position. However, I note that Waltz’s analysis is narrowly focused on international relations. For him, nuclear weapons are good because they foster peace. Philosophy of technology should expand on this thesis. To integrate Waltz into the field, scholars should interrogate the benefits and drawbacks of nuclear weapons based on a variety of values – including, but not limited to, those that Waltz proposes. Value neutrality thesis; nuclear weapons: international relations; history of ideas; ethics of technology.