Question 1
The author seeks to address the need to socially and practically engage philosophical practices in all innovations. For example, he emphasizes that people often gamble on the success of future innovations to bail them out of socioeconomic and political problems created by innovations, inventions utilized without understanding their impact to the society fully (Briggle 12).
Question 2
The author is an advocate for precautionary ideologies, he distilled the complexity of technological innovations into three dimensions to guarantee a reasonable outcome. Those vulnerable to risk must give consent, a system of monitoring must be established when challenges arise, and experiments must be modified when problems arise (Briggle 12).
Question 3
The argument in the article incorporates a conclusion that agrees with the premises on which the discourse is built. Moreover, the writer gives a recommendation embedded on precautionary principles, on how engineers and their corporate employees should take into account various factors before subjecting the society to their discoveries. However, Briggle focuses on one issue within a specific geographical and physical background; hence, his arguments do not extend his notion in other places with different jurisdictions, and this makes his discourse biased.
Question 4
A research should incorporate the three dimensions suggested by Briggle, which include; people’s consent, monitoring, and modifications (Kermisch 10). The precautionary concept helps a researcher to identify possible impacts of the project, monitor and evaluate it and establish possible modifications to the project.
Question 5
In his book, Briggle emphasizes that philosophy cannot operate independently of science. Hence, the concept of proactivity and precautionary stances should be discussed further on their legal and ethical obligations in science and philosophy. Additionally, the article should further elaborate on whether philosophers should make judgments about causation before meeting particular scientific standards (Kermisch, 16).
Works Cited
Briggle, Adam. A Field Philosopher’s Guide to Fracking: How One Texas Town Stood Up to Big Oil and Gas. 2015. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/13/books/review/a-field-philosophers-guide-to-fracking-by-adam-briggle.html. Accessed 29th March 2018
Kermisch, C. “Risk and Responsibility: A Complex and Evolving Relationship.” Science and Engineering Ethics. 18.1 (2012): 91-102. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3275725/. Accessed 29th March 2018