Hans Jonas on Technology and Ethics: A Nine-Point Summary

Introduction: Ethics in the Technological Age

Ethics has been studied and practiced for thousands of years, but as times change, so do aspects of this important dimension of human life. The twentieth century brought many such changes: women received the right to vote, world wars crossed the globe, and technological advances spurred a golden age in human development. These changes have had positive consequences, making living easier and better in many ways. However, an argument exists that ethics was also transformed by the advent of this great technological change. Hans Jonas, the modern father of Gnosticism (Schonborn, 2007), wrote a widely regarded essay discussing the contribution that technological advances have made to ethics (Jonas, 1974). His nine points of argument have become the philosophy by which many live. This essay summarizes those nine points.

Nature, Human Dominion, and the Limits of Ethics

Jonas begins by quoting a passage by Sophocles that celebrates humans as the conquerors of nature and the rulers of their domain (Jonas, 1974). This famous piece by a Greek thinker who admired the early accomplishments of humanity was directly countered by Jonas. He held the view that people had not truly conquered nature, and that nature — always present in the background — is just as powerful as it ever was. The fact that people were able to exert control over parts of the natural order did not mean that they had any real impact on nature as a whole. Nature is stronger and more resilient than humans can ever be (Jonas, 1985). Jonas went on to become a leader of the environmental movement in his native Germany (Casada da Rocha & Rodriguez-Arias, 2008).

His second point develops the argument about ethics more directly. He states that morality has always dealt with human relationships and had nothing to do with the natural world. In traditional ethical thinking, the natural world was neutral — anything that was not human fell outside the laws of ethics as understood by philosophers since the so-called dawn of civilization (Jonas, 1974). His further contention in this section is that all of the maxims that served as hallmarks of ethical thought concerned the present moment. People felt a responsibility to treat others honorably right now, but there was no consideration of how present actions might harm the future. Jonas is thus setting the stage for an argument that a fundamental ethical change must occur in the lives of people today (Scodel, 2003).

Technology as Enlightener and Destroyer

He then branches into the argument, associated with Kant, that humans do not need some rare form of intelligence to construct an ethical stance. He never claims that people are at their core ethical, but he does say that one does not need an unnaturally high intellect to understand the difference between good and bad, right and wrong. Aristotle seemed to hold the opposite view — he argued that government would eventually come down to a few highly intellectual individuals who would be beneficent because of their superior minds (Schonborn, 2007). Jonas refutes that idea, yet also observes that even the most basic intellect tends to think in present terms rather than for the sake of future generations or the continued viability of the planet.

In the fourth section of the essay, Jonas truly begins to explore his central thesis. He argues that technology is enlightening in several ways. First, it demonstrates that ethics must change because people everywhere are now affected by the actions of everyone else. The old ethical stance may still be adequate for close personal relationships, but it must change when the larger picture is considered. Since technology has brought people from all parts of the world closer together, it is more apparent that a general ethics must be reformulated to incorporate everyone within the human sphere (Jonas, 1974).

His other contention is that modern technology has also opened people's eyes to the fact that humans are not the great benefactors of the world (Scodel, 2003). On the contrary, human actions have been one of the primary reasons that the Earth is in distress. Technology has had two very different consequences: on the one hand, technological innovation has increased the rate at which humans adversely affect the Earth; on the other, this rapid expansion of technology has also revealed the extent of the destruction being enacted (Jonas, 1974). Therefore, he sees technology as an agent of both good and evil. He also sees the enlightenment that technology has made possible as capable of bringing about a change in the flawed ethical stance of the past.