Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Recolector de Cienci...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
addClaim

Retos filosóficos de las sociedades digitales: esbozo de un enfoque sistémico

Authors: Wagner, A.S.;

Retos filosóficos de las sociedades digitales: esbozo de un enfoque sistémico

Abstract

[EN] This article addresses some specific phenomena in the field of digital communication, namely disinformation, infodemics and conspir-acy mania; these phenomena make it difficult for people to distinguish between truth and lies, fact and fiction, opinion and knowledge, and in the long run create indifference to the distinction itself. These issues have, thus, decisively altered users’ patterns of rationality and common sense and contributed to the rise of anti-democratic and anti-scien-tific attitudes. To tackle this complex problem, a systemic approach is proposed which frames these concepts as factors that interfere in the ethical-epistemic equilibrium that links uncertainty, trust and responsi-bility. After identifying a set of dynamics generated by these disruptive factors, three aspects are explored in depth: the polarisation and lack of a deliberative culture, the necessary correction of the social image of scientific practice, and the impact of the post-truth discourse. The article concludes with reflections about how to reformulate the three key con-cepts –uncertainty, trust and responsibility– in light of the demands of the digital sphere

[ES] El artículo aborda una serie de fenómenos en el ámbito de la comunicación digital —la desinformación, la infodemia y la conspira-noia— que fomentan la indiferencia respecto a la distinción entre verdad y mentira, realidad y ficción, opinión y conocimiento. Así han provocado cambios decisivos en los patrones de racionalidad y sentido común de los usuarios y contribuido al auge de posturas antidemocráticas y anticien-tíficas. Para afrontar la compleja problemática, se desarrolla una pers-pectiva sistémica que enfoca dichos fenómenos como factores perturba-dores de un equilibrio ético-epistémico entre incertidumbre, confianza y responsabilidad. Tras identificar una serie de dinámicas generadas por estos factores disruptivos, se profundiza en tres aspectos: la polarización y falta de cultura deliberativa, la necesaria corrección de la imagen social de la práctica científica y el impacto del discurso de la posverdad. El artí-culo concluye con reflexiones sobre la redefinición de los tres conceptos clave de incertidumbre, confianza y responsabilidad a la luz de las exigen-cias de la esfera digital.

Este artículo se enmarca en los proyectos RESPONTRUST (SGL2104001, PTI Salud Global del CSIC), financiado por la Unión Europea “NextGeneration”/PRTR, INconRES (PID2020-117219GB-I00), financiado por MCIN/ AEI/10.13039/501100011033/ y ON TRUST-CM (H2019/HUM-5699), financiado por la Consejería de Educación e Investigación de la Comunidad de Madrid, Fondo Social Europeo.

Este artículo está sujeto a una licencia CC BY-NC 3.0

Peer reviewed

Keywords

Confianza, Infodemics, Infodemia, Incertidumbre, Equilibrio ético-epistémico, Equilibrium, Ethical-epistemic, Uncertainty, Posverdad, Trust, Responsability, Post-truth, Conspiranoia, Conspiracy, Desinformación, Disinformation, Responsabilidad

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Green