Declaration by design: Rhetoric, arguments, and demonstration design practices article review

Declaration by design: Rhetoric, arguments, and demonstration design practices article review

From the prior problem dated back to the 20th century, Moral responsibility displays the main theme in technology advancement. Although the magnitude of conceptions and attitude shows significant discrepancy, the prevalence of responsibility in articles remains outstanding. As one tries to read the artwork of various political discourse and scholars, various rhetoric fictions conspire. In the analysis of responsibilities coined to technology advancement, rhetorical fantasies manifest throughout the artwork. Rhetoric fiction is a term that coined to persuade, inform, or motivate the subject matter in either writing or speech. To see the rhetoric in moral responsibility associated with technology, one needs to understand first the paradigm of the situation. In the article “how the world was saved,” the philosopher explores instances of these paradigmatic situations such as designing, persuading, and procedures. However, such paradigm situations display an ethical confrontation between one choice to another. Owing to moral responsibility in the advancement of technology, people have assumed the consequences of their choices. The development in technology, therefore, shape the societies in terms of their degree of choice.

Designing is a rhetorical term frequently employed by scholars and political discourse in their speeches and writing. The first person to correlate design with technology is Richard Buchanan in his article “Declaration by design: Rhetoric, arguments, and demonstration design practices.” In his article, he makes an intuition salient to the introduction of this article that products influence the response of human beings. The contribution by Buchanan display a rhetorical fiction. Buchanan considers rhetoric as an “art of changing pattern of settings, shapes, and new actions of individuals and communities with time.” He draws his argument of “design” by withdrawing it from the technology realm and bring it from a rhetorical perspective.

According to Buchanan, designing is not applied science but instead a rhetorical fiction. His argument base on the contingencies of practicability and actions rather than scientific principles accorded. For instance, he recognized “logo” as a technological term in reasoning as used by Aristotle. In logic, technical terms are used by the designers in altering gin order to solve practical issues. By appealing to pathos, he believed that designers entertain the audiences by providing them with possibilities for practical reasoning. He said that “their products attract and hold the audience in surprisingly different ways.” Buchanan argues that the designers can capture the attention of their audiences by their products and leave a gap for technological reasoning.

Another contemporary field coined to technology in reasoning is persuasion. Though it’s not widely used, persuasion gives the realm of technological advancement in the psychological account. Among the scholars in critical thinking are B.J. Fogg, Verbeek, Buchanan, and Aristotle. Verbeek argues that persuasion is like a force that spruces up from debouching to coercion. Fogg dwells his persuasive approach in the use of computers in the advancement of technology. From his work “engaged in original research exploring the parallels between the persuasive influence of the computers and human agents,” technological mediation displays fictions associated with rhetorical approaches. Fogg believes that the computer can shape people’s attitudes and behavior.

Fogg’s argument is, therefore, right in the scope of reasoning. He first gives his definition for persuasion as “the act of changing ones’ attitude or behavior or both.” He, therefore, gives an insight into the designers’ intention to influence the audience. In his writing “…focuses on human-computer interaction and not computer-mediated communication,” Fogg coined his argument on persuasion. The designer planned the outcome leaving one with limited choice hence conquering with Buchanan argument. Fogg’s definition of persuasion in technology also agrees with the Aristotle rhetorical approach. The modest translation of Aristotle’s’ meaning is “The art of determining how to persuade in any given situation.” For a change in behavior to occur, ability, motivation, and the trigger must be incorporated. The computer can play the same roles in ensuring such changes. Technology, therefore, persuade peoples mind and influence our choices. Such purposes in philosophy, shape our interactions with others as well as our perceptions.

Another area where technology advancement has influenced moral responsibility is the digital approach of proceduralism. Ian Bogost persuasively puts his argument. Digital rhetoric, he says, “must address the role of the proceduralism, the unique representation of the computer properties.” The above gives an insight into some set of rules which have a rhetorical impact. He argues that the set procedures rely on the accorded symbols, which control actions and imaginations of people. Though Bogost makes his point in a dramatical approach, his argument garners him credit by both Buchanan and Aristotle. Therefore, in determining how clear the argument is, we should pay less attention to rhetorical facets like the appeal to pathos.

Conclusion

Advancement in technology displays a wide discrepancy in moral responsibility. Our argument is mostly dependent on our understanding of what is happening in our surroundings or computer. Development in technology has constituted three facets of rhetoric fictions. The rhetoric fictions include designing, persuading, and procedural. However, the human degree of choice confronts such a paradigm. The moral responsibility of people directly influences paradigmatic situations, which has shaped their choices and actions. Such discrepancy in decisions is resulting in consequences that usually assumed due to their immateriality.