@article{oai:icu.repo.nii.ac.jp:00005018,
 author = {萩原　, 優騎},
 issue = {88},
 journal = {社会科学ジャーナル},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {It is said that a characteristic of contemporary society is the development of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) and its globalization. Some ethicists stress the necessity of universal criteria of relationships between ICT and society. From the view of universalism, it is preferable to have common ethics on ICT in global society beyond the areas. They criticize the viewpoints of cultural relativism or pluralism. However, the premises of their criticisms are not necessarily self-evident. This paper aims to reconsider the concerned premises by analyzing the relationship between universalism and cultural relativism from the views of the philosophy of science and sociology. A typical example of universalism in information ethics is the concept of “core value” proposed by James H. Moor. According to him, common values such as life, happiness, freedom and so on are common to every culture. He says that common values are fundamental aspects in addressing global issues. Deborah G. Johnson also criticizes cultural relativism. She points out the inconsistences of cultural relativism. When cultural relativists appeal the importance of toleration based on the ideas of relativity and variety of cultures, their premise is that everyone should tolerate others belonging to different cultures. They assume that every culture should be tolerant, which is precisely a universalistic approach.However, the antagonism between universalism and cultural relativism is not self-evident anymore. Yoichiro Murakami shows the paradoxical relationship between them from the viewpoint of the philosophy of science. Universalists try to universalize the fruits of modern civilization. Still, they do not necessarily succeed in achieving their aims because local residents protest the waves of modernization by claiming the importance of their own cultures and values. Cultural relativists also find themselves in a dilemma. They try to support the movements of local residents to protect their cultures and values. Still, some residents want to change their traditional lifestyle by accepting the fruits of modern civilization. Murakami says that it is necessary to relativize the antagonism itself between universalism and cultural relativism. To put it into practice, he proposes that one should continuously seek less-conflictual solutions, instead of the least-conflictual one. Niklas Luhmann also sociologically analyzes the paradoxical matter mentioned above. He explains the difference between a first-order observation and a second-order one. A first-order observation is when one claims relativity and the existence of a variety of cultures. In its turn, a secondorder observation is when one observes what and how one observes, that is, one observes observation. Based on these definitions, it can be said that the dilemmas of universalism and cultural relativism are the result of a secondorder observation. Luhmann proposes that one should attributively return to a first-order observation. If one can share the understanding about material common grounds such as lifestyle with others, he/she may tolerate others despite the differences of values and ideologies. In this way, one can coexist with others without consensus-building though the understanding is a fiction. Murakami and Luhmann's proposals show how to escape the dilemmas of universalism and cultural pluralism stemming from their antagonism. They show a possibility to establish a new viewpoint of information ethics beyond this antagonism.},
 pages = {5--24},
 title = {情報倫理学における文化相対主義批判の再検討},
 year = {2021}
}