Call for papers: Ethics and Philosophy of Decentralized Technologies
Journal: Ethics and Information Technology
Editors:
- Georgy Ishmaev. Researcher, Inria, France
- Patrik Alexander Hummel. Professor, Luzern University, Switzerland.
After more than a decade of development, blockchain-based systems and applications continue to progress as a research field and as an industry. Blockchains and other decentralized systems solutions now include consensus protocols, smart contract platforms, and decentralized applications for finance, identity, supply chains, governance, and public records. At the same time, contestation about direction, prospects, core values, and effects of decentralized systems implementations persists.
Contemporary digital infrastructures entrench critical dependencies across societies and shape many dimensions of human life. In this landscape, questions arise about what role decentralized platforms and protocols can and should assume. Even when designed in good faith as neutral tools, these socio-technical systems have intended and unintended effects on societies and incorporate implicit value commitments into design structures shaped by game-theoretic incentives, cryptographic mechanisms, and social processes of coordination.
We invite contributions that investigate philosophical aspects of decentralized technologies. We welcome work that illuminates by means of philosophical reflection what these systems are, what they are perceived to be, the world these systems help bring about, what they facilitate or hamper, and what we should endorse or resist as they scale. Submissions may, amongst others, develop conceptual frameworks, descriptive heuristics, normative criteria, and/or decision-guiding analyses that advance our understanding of these systems and can guide responsible design and governance.
Contributions on decentralized systems in broader scope (e.g., decentralized AI), are also welcomed if implications for philosophy are reflected. Including (but not limited to): political philosophy, moral philosophy, philosophy of technology, philosophy of law, etc., and coming from all traditions, whether continental, analytic, or hybrid.
Suggested but not exhaustive list of invited topics:
1) Systems, decentralization, and critical infrastructures in digital society. How should we characterize blockchain networks as critical infrastructure, in both descriptive and normative terms, including their security assumptions, governance arrangements, dependencies on off-chain actors, and interactions with legal and financial systems?
(2 ) How can ethical considerations be made salient for developers, users, and other involved stakeholders, not as external constraints but as internalized reasons that shape incentives, procedures, and accountability structures. By what means of conceptual engineering can the conceptual gaps between technical analyses and philosophical frameworks be bridged? How can we choose appropriate levels of abstraction to map accurately low-level technical analysis to moral claims.
(3) Privacy and identity. How do systems and technologies shape persons and communities. What are the ethical implications of decentralized identity solutions, privacy enhancing tools, and reputation protocols. How do design choices influence agency, recognition, and vulnerability across different populations.
(4) Incentives in decentralized systems. How do token design, rewards, penalties, and governance rights align behavior with social goals. What is the role of stewardship, virtue, and duty in settings dominated by incentive engineering. How should we analyze unintended consequences such as short-termism, collusion, and externalities.
(5) How can we analyze and mitigate information asymmetries in blockchain ecosystems. How to distinguish organic expertise gaps stemming from complexity and strategically produced opacity generated and maintained for financial gains. Analyze resultant moral hazards and epistemic injustice, and propose remedies.
(6) Cultures and coordination in crypto, and accidental cults. What cultural patterns, myths, and memes sustain or distort collective action. How can communities cultivate critical discourse, distributed leadership, and epistemic humility, and reduce risks of charismatic domination, echo chambers, and manipulation.
(7) What do we owe to one another in infrastructures designed to resist unilateral control, when protocols are intentionally open for anybody to use, to copy and repurpose, what forms of moral responsibility, liability, and accountability are appropriate, how should designers and governors approach kill switches, safety valves, exit rights, and governance minimization, and what duties arise toward users, counterparties, and bystanders in globally accessible systems?
For information and submission: Ethics and Philosophy of Decentralized Technologies | SpringerLink