This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Ethics: Are we misusing the terms "master-slave". Do we even have a community / forum in which we can discuss this?

The recent world wide considerations of the diversity challenges in our society has highlighted that we in Engineering can be perpetuating some of the derogatory terms implicit within our use of "Master-Slave" for purely inanimate technical control scenarios. [1 - N]


We have policies on slavery that every volunteer, staff member and Trustee must read and abide to, but it appears we haven't noticed, to any significant extent, our own continued use of "slave" in our writings.


Do we even have a community or forum in which we can discuss this ethical, and publishing issue?


Philip Oakley

[1] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-53273923

[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3243656.stm

[3] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53050955

[4 ] http://www.jstor.com/stable/40061475   "Broken Metaphor: The Master-Slave Analogy in Technical Literature"

[5] https://www.theiet.org/involved/volunteering-for-the-iet/volunteer-hub/our-policies/anti-slavery-policy/


Aside: Is there some tick box to get notifications of replies sent?
Parents

  • Philip, how does avoiding use of the word help those who have suffered or do suffer from slavery?



    Ahh, the 'facemask' conundrum.  You are pushing the wrong end of the piece of string. It's the deliberate and potentially malicious use of the word to pretend that those who have 'slave' ancestry are to be considered as simply inanimate objects by association that is the issue. At some point it's simply a level of indifference to the effect on others.


    In essence it's no different to having children clean under the working looms in the mills of the past. Children were cheap, easily produced and disposable..  Not.


    We have better alternatives, lets use them. E2, E1, D1-3, etc.
Reply

  • Philip, how does avoiding use of the word help those who have suffered or do suffer from slavery?



    Ahh, the 'facemask' conundrum.  You are pushing the wrong end of the piece of string. It's the deliberate and potentially malicious use of the word to pretend that those who have 'slave' ancestry are to be considered as simply inanimate objects by association that is the issue. At some point it's simply a level of indifference to the effect on others.


    In essence it's no different to having children clean under the working looms in the mills of the past. Children were cheap, easily produced and disposable..  Not.


    We have better alternatives, lets use them. E2, E1, D1-3, etc.
Children
No Data