Behavioral Mechanics2026-04-26
— collision —
Technology Moral Distance — Enablement vs. Permission Structure
- Technology and Moral Distance (technology enables distance but doesn't require it; the choice to use distance remains) - vs. Authority Institutional Override (institutions that provide tools also…
| Sources | Technology and Moral Distance (technology enables distance but doesn't require it; the choice to use distance remains)
vs. Authority Institutional Override (institutions that provide tools also provide permission structures that make refusal of the tool functionally impossible) |
| Tension | Keen argues that technology enables but doesn't require moral distance. A drone operator chooses to maintain distance; the drone only makes it possible. Therefore, the moral responsibility remains individual.
But this assumes a context where:
1. The institution provides the tool
2. The individual independently decides whether to use it
3. Refusal of the tool carries no institutional consequence
In actual institutio… |
| Candidate | Technology's moral neutrality only holds outside institutional contexts. Within institutions, technology is a permission structure. Giving a soldier a drone doesn't enable a choice; it enforces one. The institution can claim "we provided the capability; they chose to use it" while actually having structured the choice so refusal is impossible.
Testing: Do individuals outside institutional authority structures use distance-enabling technology differently than those within? Does distance in perso… |
pressure 13speculative
What Would Need to Be True
Technology and institutional authority together create permission structures that individuals cannot refuse
The distinction between "enables" and "requires" collapses at the institutional level
Individual moral responsibility in institutional contexts is partly fictitious — the institution has already decided
Institutions use technology specifically because it obscures their decision-making within technological inevitability