Compassion-Focused Technologies: Reflections and Future Directions
- PMID: 34054636
- PMCID: PMC8155300
- DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.603618
Compassion-Focused Technologies: Reflections and Future Directions
Abstract
Compassion is a prosocial motivation that is critical to the development and survival of the human species. Cultivating compassion involves developing deep wisdom, insight, and understanding into the nature and causes of human suffering; and wisdom and commitment to take positive action to alleviate suffering. This perspective piece discusses how compassion relates to the context of modern technology, which has developed at a rapid pace in recent decades. While advances in digital technology build on humankind's vast capacity to develop practical tools that promise to enrich our lives and improve our social connections, in reality the effects are often far from benign. The motives underlying the development of many contemporary digital platforms seem rooted in competitiveness and capitalism; while modern social media and online platforms are having a profound and pervasive impact on the mental health and wellbeing of humans around the globe. Nonetheless, digital technology holds considerable potential to promote compassionate insight, wisdom, and prosocial behavior. We reflect on the current state of technology within human society and examine the notion of compassionate technologies; discuss how contemporary paradigm shifts such as the inclusive design movement may be harnessed to build tools and platforms that promote collective good and increase prosocial behavior; and highlight examples of initiatives that are harnessing modern technology to advance democracy, collective knowledge, and personal freedoms and agency.
Keywords: compassion; digital technology; extended reality; human society; perspective; social media.
Copyright © 2021 Day, Finkelstein, Field, Matthews, Kirby and Doty.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
-
- Ahn T. K., Janssen M. A., Ostrom E. (2004). “Signals, symbols and human cooperation,” in Origins and Nature of Sociality, eds Sussman R. W., Chapman A. R. (New York: Aldine De Gruyter; ), 122–139.
-
- Amin M. (2019). The Benefit of Designing for Everyone.
-
- Annala M., Kaskinen T., Lee S., Leppanen J., Mattila K., Neuvonen A., et al. (2015). Design for Government: Human-centric governance through experiments. Retrieved from https://www.demoshelsinki.fi/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Design-for-Gover...
-
- Behavioural Insights. (2016). Prabha. Retrieved from: http://www.behaviouralinsights.co.uk/
-
- Behrens J., Kistner A., Nitsche A., Swierczek B. (2014). The principles of LiquidFeedback. Berlin: Interaktive Demokratie e. V.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
