Attention as Practice

Buddhist Ethics Responses to Persuasive Technologies

Journal Article (2023)
Author(s)

Gunter Bombaerts (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Joel Anderson (Universiteit Utrecht)

Matthew James Dennis (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Alessio Gerola (Wageningen University & Research)

Lily Frank (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Tom Hannes (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Jeroen Hopster (University of Twente)

L. Marin (TU Delft - Technology, Policy and Management)

Andreas Spahn (Eindhoven University of Technology)

Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-023-09680-4 Final published version
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2023
Language
English
Research Group
Ethics & Philosophy of Technology
Journal title
Global Philosophy
Issue number
2
Volume number
33
Article number
25
Downloads counter
184
Collections
Institutional Repository
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

The “attention economy” refers to the tech industry’s business model that treats human attention as a commodifiable resource. The libertarian critique of this model, dominant within tech and philosophical communities, claims that the persuasive technologies of the attention economy infringe on the individual user’s autonomy and therefore the proposed solutions focus on safeguarding personal freedom through expanding individual control. While this push back is important, current societal debates on the ethics of persuasive technologies are informed by a particular understanding of attention, rarely posited explicitly yet assumed as the default. They share the same concept of attention, namely an individualistic and descriptive concept of attention that is a cognitive process, an expendable resource, something that one should control individually. We step away from a negative analysis in terms of external distractions and aim for positive answers, turning to Buddhist ethics to formulate a critique of persuasive technology from a genuinely ethical perspective. Buddhist ethics points at our attention’s inescapable ethical and ontological embeddedness. Attention as practice requires “the right effort” to distinguish desirable and undesirable states, the “right concentration” to stop the flow we are caught in, and the “right mindfulness” to fortify the ability to attend to the present situation and keep in mind a general sense of life’s direction. We offer input for further philosophical inquiry on attention as practice and attention ecology. We put forward comfort/effort and individualism/collectivism as two remaining central tensions in need of further research.