Nnadiebube Journal of Philosophy

Technology has changed almost every part of our lives. It has brought great benefits in health, education, communication and work, but it has also created serious ethical problems. Questions about who is responsible when an algorithm makes a mistake, or how biotechnology should respect human dignity, are now urgent. This article looks closely at how Denis Alexander understands this link between technology and ethical responsibility. The study uses critical and conceptual analysis. It reads Alexander's major works alongside other key thinkers in the philosophy of technology such as Heidegger, Ellul, Jonas, Floridi, Borgmann, Winner and Feenberg. The aim is to understand Alexander's central ideas, especially stewardship, human agency and human dignity, and to test how useful they are for today's problems like artificial intelligence, biotechnology and digital surveillance. The findings show that Alexander offers a helpful corrective to deterministic views of technology. He argues that technology is not an independent force that controls us. It is a human activity, shaped by our values and choices, and it remains value laden from design to use. Because of this, scientists, engineers, institutions and ordinary users all carry moral responsibility. His idea of stewardship is particularly strong. It suggests that we are not owners of scientific knowledge but caretakers who must use it to promote human flourishing, protect the environment and serve the common good. At the same time, the article finds two limits in Alexander's framework. First, he focuses mainly on individual responsibility and says less about the political, economic and institutional structures that now drive technology. Today, big corporations, states and international bodies shape innovation far more than individuals do. Second, his ethical vision is influenced by theology, which enriches it but can make it harder to apply in plural societies where people do not share the same faith commitments. The article therefore recommends a broader approach. It suggests keeping Alexander's core insights on agency and stewardship but combining them with stronger governance mechanisms. This includes clear institutional accountability, democratic participation in technology policy, and continuous ethical review throughout the life of a technology. It draws on Polo's concept of guided acceptance to argue that societies should not reject or accept new technologies blindly, but assess them step by step for their effects on dignity, justice, culture and sustainability.

Open Full Text (PDF)