<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<journal>
  <titleid>75447</titleid>
  <issn>2712-9934</issn>
  <journalInfo lang="ENG">
    <title>Technology and Language</title>
  </journalInfo>
  <issue>
    <volume>5</volume>
    <number>1</number>
    <altNumber>14</altNumber>
    <dateUni>2024</dateUni>
    <pages>1-169</pages>
    <articles>
      <article>
        <artType>EDI</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>1-6</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0009-0003-9910-7907</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>South China University of Technology</orgName>
              <surname>Wu</surname>
              <initials>Guolin</initials>
              <address>381 Wushan Rd, Tianhe District, Guangzhou</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, China</orgName>
              <surname>Luo</surname>
              <initials>Dong </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Hermeneutics: A Broadening Scope of Inquiry</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The field of hermeneutics has demonstrably co-evolved with the development of texts themselves, shaped by the advancements in science, technology, and various forms of inquiry that characterize our societies. Initially focused on interpreting specific classical texts, it has broadened its scope to encompass a wider range of textual analysis. The shift extends beyond literature, now also incorporating the concept of Dasein in philosophical inquiry. Furthermore, the field has moved from specializing in esoteric or religious texts to a focus on the vast realm of humanistic texts. This expansion continues to embrace scientific and technological discourse, including even the complexities of quantum mechanics. The understanding of these diverse areas – humanities, natural sciences, and technology – is fundamental. After all, both scientific discoveries and technological advancements rely on our ability to comprehend the world around us. This special issue delves into the exploration of science and technology through the multifaceted lens of hermeneutics. It features nine contributions exploring a wide range of topics. These contributions begin with fundamental inquiries into human interaction and communication with things, transitioning to examinations of general scientific hermeneutics and hermeneutics of more specific scientific subjects. These include the interpretation of quantum mechanics and the birth of molecular biology. The contributions theт move on toward practical hermeneutics, discussing ancient Chinese technological thought, the current use of artificial intelligence in scientific research, and Technofutures.&#13;
&#13;
.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.01</doi>
          <udk>1:001: 801.7</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Science</keyword>
            <keyword>Technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Quantum</keyword>
            <keyword>AI</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.1/</furl>
          <file>1-6.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>7-17</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0003-1329-9665</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Technical University of Darmstadt</orgName>
              <surname>Würtenberger</surname>
              <initials>Sandra </initials>
              <address>Darmstadt, Germany</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Communicating with Technical and Scientific Artifacts between Hermeneutics and Sociology of Science</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">In this article an attempt is discussed to combine a traditional concept from philosophical hermeneutics with ideas from the sociology of science. The main aim is to describe a way of communicating with technical and scientific artifacts. Thoughts from the hermeneutic concept of the German philosopher Hans Georg Gadamer (1900-2002) will be combined with ideas of the French sociologist Bruno Latour (1947-2022) which he developed in his texts on the sociology of science and technology. Before this approach is developed, the embedding and differentiation from previous hermeneutic concepts is discussed. Especially the concept of material hermeneutics developed by Ihde and Verbeek is outlined in order to contrast the new approach. – The first task of the article´s main chapter is to show the similarities between the two concepts of Gadamer and Latour, which at first sight seem very different. The second task is to use these concepts for a better description of the interaction or communication between human beings and technical or scientific objects. An approach is shown and discussed that can help to analyse the process of creation and the roles of entities generated in the course of performing science and technology, which – released into the world – become independent entities in their own right.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.02</doi>
          <udk>1:001</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Sociology of science</keyword>
            <keyword>Philosophy of science and technology</keyword>
            <keyword>Artifact theory</keyword>
            <keyword>Dilthey</keyword>
            <keyword>Gadamer</keyword>
            <keyword>Latour</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.2/</furl>
          <file>7-17.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>18-36</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0009-0003-9910-7907</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>South China University of Technology</orgName>
              <surname>Wu</surname>
              <initials>Guolin</initials>
              <address>381 Wushan Rd, Tianhe District, Guangzhou</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">A Hermeneutical Analysis of Quantum Mechanics</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The calculations and predictions of quantum mechanics have been successful, but there is a debate whether quantum mechanics is understood. Understanding quantum mechanics from a hermeneutical perspective will reveal new features of quantum mechanics. This requires first of all a review of key concepts as they are rendered in German, English, and Chinese. Interpretation [Chinese “quán shì”] in hermeneutics consists of Erklärung [explanation – Chinese “shuō míng”] and Auslegung [explication – Chinese “chǎn shì”]. The development of quantum mechanics reflects the iterative process of explication-explanation-explication-explanation. Quantum matter revealed by quantum mechanics is characterized by hermeneutics, fusion of horizons, and history of effects. This can be shown in respect to the delayed-choice experiment. Here, the “past horizon” of the photon becomes an unfinished history, a reversible quantum being, which can only be transformed into a classical existence through quantum measurement. A contemporary photon's “past” reality and “present” reality will be overlaid and fused to form the photon's “whole” reality. This is the photonic reality, and it involves a superimposed horizon that forms the whole of the total effect. This hermeneutic interpretation sheds light not only on the interpretation of quantum mechanics but also on the question why there are several such interpretations with a tendency for more to come. In short, the intertwining of explication and explanation, and the projection of meaning reveal that quantum mechanics is hermeneutic.&#13;
&#13;
.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.03</doi>
          <udk>001:801.73</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Quantum matter</keyword>
            <keyword>Horizon fusion</keyword>
            <keyword>Effective history</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.3/</furl>
          <file>18-36.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>37-52</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0003-4854-0199</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran</orgName>
              <surname>Mirzaei</surname>
              <initials>Sadegh </initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Affinity between Feedback Mechanism and Hermeneutical Circle</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">Hermeneutics traditionally revolves around human experiences and sense-making, often considered distinct from the scientific and technological realms of non-human experimentation and tool-making. This contrast between the humane and the artifactual or the natural, associated with understanding and interpretation on the side of the former and control and experimentation on the other, creates what might be termed a Diltheyan wound. This paper aims to find a remedy for this wound by revealing the affinity between two pivotal concepts in engineering and the humanities: the feedback mechanism and the hermeneutical circle. Investigating their relationship at historical and conceptual levels, we find that both concepts trace back to ancient times but they both flourish in early 19th-century modern Europe. While historical synchronicity doesn't inherently imply direct influence or constitutive interaction, conceptual analysis unveils their shared abstract theme of “circular causality,” making them affinitive to each other. Both incorporate errors and misunderstandings within closed loops of cause-and-effect relationships, seeking equilibrium in an open-ended process. Despite their stability, they dynamically adapt to new conditions, accommodating multi-stable configurations. With these historical and conceptual similarities in mind, the question of priority arises: did the feedback mechanism precede the hermeneutical circle, or vice versa? Can we make a meaningful argument for their historical or cognitive precedence over each other? At the very least, an “elective affinity” is discernible – a term borrowed from Weber's seminal exploration of the relationship between Protestantism and Capitalism. We can substitute this chemical metaphor with a cybernetic one, envisioning both concepts entangled in a “closed sequence of cause-and-effect relationships.”</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.04</doi>
          <udk>16:801.73</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Feedback mechanism</keyword>
            <keyword>Hermeneutical circle</keyword>
            <keyword>Circular causality</keyword>
            <keyword>Cybernetics</keyword>
            <keyword>Governor</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.4/</furl>
          <file>37-52.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>53-72</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0001-7564-110X</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Technical University of Darmstadt</orgName>
              <surname>Liu</surname>
              <initials>Arthur Wei-Kang</initials>
              <address> Darmstadt, Germany</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">On Scientific Explanation and Understanding – A Hermeneutic Perspective </artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">An explanation is a convincing, deductively valid argument that cites at least one law of nature. – This could be a definition of a scientific explanation that takes the notion of understanding seriously because explanation and understanding are intertwined concepts. To arrive at this conclusion, this analysis starts with the question of what makes an explanation an explanation. Philosophers of science have discussed this issue extensively since Carl G. Hempel presented his deductive-nomological model of explanation. It seems that the DN-model offers necessary but not sufficient conditions for explanation. Two prominent problems for sufficient conditions are the problem of irrelevance and the problem of symmetry. For the last seventy years philosophers of science tried to solve those problems, also proposing other possible conceptualizations of explanation, by invoking, for example, causality or contextuality. Those accounts can be brought together in order to solve the problems of the DN-model: By looking at understanding, a new combined account for explanation and understanding could be obtained. After highlighting the advantages and problems of some of the most prominent accounts of explanation, the concept of understanding is analyzed with respect to the notion of hermeneutics. Through Gadamer’s discussion of hermeneutics and understanding as well as Kuhn’s concept of paradigms, it can be shown that the natural sciences are also deeply rooted in hermeneutics and involve understanding. In the end, it can be demonstrated that understanding and explanation are two interwoven concepts. Understanding is the missing piece of the puzzle to solve the problems of explanation. </abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.05</doi>
          <udk>1: 801.73</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Hermeneutic Circle</keyword>
            <keyword>Explanatory Success</keyword>
            <keyword>Hans-Georg Gadamer</keyword>
            <keyword>Thomas Kuhn</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.5/</furl>
          <file>53-72.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>73-88</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Sun Yat-sen University</orgName>
              <surname>Wang</surname>
              <initials>Zhikang</initials>
              <address>Guangzhou. China</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Description, Understanding, and Explanation：How Scientific Interpretation Gave Birth to Modern Molecular Biology</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">This paper illustrates the role and position of hermeneutics methods in science and technology through the analysis of a scientific case, namely the generation of modern molecular biology, and the difference, connection, and mutual transformation of “description-text,” “understanding-text,” and “explanation-text” in the process of scientific research. The results show that the interpretation and transformation of scientific text often needs a certain cultural fulcrum and that it works by means of analogy. This is complemented through natural language. The complexity and richness of language transformations allow for scientific discovery and technological innovation to break through the limitations of objective conditions. A theory of complex thinking systems illustrates these results relatively well. Through the analysis of hierarchical levels of thought, two ways are revealed for transforming things and reducing them understandability. Mediated by natural language, these two ways involve the transformation and recovery, firstly, of abstract concepts in different layers, and secondly, of intuitive images in different layers. The results all provide support for the ontological and methodological foundation of scientific interpretation methods. Science and technology are facing more and more complex objects, and mathematical induction and deduction may become more and more difficult. Therefore, scientific interpretation may become an essential way to expand new fields of science and technological innovation.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.06</doi>
          <udk>001: 801.73</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Genetic information interpretation</keyword>
            <keyword>Text transformation</keyword>
            <keyword>Thinking system</keyword>
            <keyword>Understanding</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.6/</furl>
          <file>73-88.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>89-105</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Fudan University</orgName>
              <surname>Liu</surname>
              <initials>Tiantian </initials>
              <address>Shanghai, China</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0003-4199-5940</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Colorado School of Mines</orgName>
              <surname>Mitcham</surname>
              <initials>Carl</initials>
              <address>1500 Illinois St., Golden, CO 80401, USA</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Toward Practical Hermeneutics of Fourth Paradigm AI for Science</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The combination of artificial intelligence and science creates a new method for scientific research, which has achieved magnificent success, but also raises questions of how to understand the knowledge produced by this method. Hermeneutics is a method of interpreting scripture that is widely used in the humanities such as history. Based on the history of science, Thomas Kuhn suggests that science can also be understood hermeneutically. Building on Kuhn’s work, Joseph Rouse argues that there are two hermeneutics for understanding scientific knowledge, a theoretical hermeneutics and a practical hermeneutics. The knowledge generated by AI-enabled science can also be examined from the perspective of these two hermeneutics. Theoretical hermeneutics argues that scientific knowledge has not been revolutionized at the theoretical level and that AI is only another tool to improve the efficiency of scientific research. However, this approach fails to acknowledge problems of AI-enabled knowledge generation such as data as a new form of publication and AI-assisted writing, automated laboratories, the role of AI in knowledge generation, and the opaqueness, unexplainability and bias of machine learning-generated knowledge. This article suggests the need for practical hermeneutics to address the above issues and to understand the knowledge produced by new research methods in the context of scientific practice.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.07</doi>
          <udk>1: 004.8</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>AI for science</keyword>
            <keyword>theoretical hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>practical hermeneutics</keyword>
            <keyword>Joseph Rouse</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.7/</furl>
          <file>89-105.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>106-115</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Zhaoqing University</orgName>
              <surname>Zeng</surname>
              <initials>Danfeng</initials>
              <address>Zhaoqing, China</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
          <author num="002">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Zhaoqing University</orgName>
              <surname>Liu</surname>
              <initials>Qiong</initials>
              <address>Zhaoqing, China </address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Hermeneutic Analysis of Ancient Chinese Conceptions of Technology</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">The etymological and historical investigation shows that ‘Jì Shù’[Technology] in ancient China appeared in two Chinese characters: ‘Jì’ and ‘Shù’, which have different meaning, but have something in common. Both of them refer to the art and skills, while ‘Jì’ sometimes refers to the craftsman who has skill, and ‘Shù’ generally refers to the method, tactics, way, procedure and path. There are two knowledge forms of ancient Chinese technology: the dominant ‘Shù’ and the recessive one, and ‘Qì’ is its material form with its certain structure and function. ‘Dào’ has a very close relationship with ‘Jì’ [Skils] and ‘Qì [Utensils].’ Dào is the root of all things and also the root of ‘Jì.’ ‘Jì’ bears ‘Dào.’ ‘Jì’ conforms to the way of nature. The relationship between ‘Dào’ and ‘Qì ’on the level of theory has undergone two stages of evolution. Ancient Chinese scholars in the Zhou, Qin, Han, and Early Tang Dynasties stated that ‘Dào’ stands for ‘Tǐ’ [Noumenon/Thing-in-itself], and ‘Qì’ for ‘Yònɡ’ [Utility]. The relationship between ‘Dào’ and ‘Qì’ would then be entirely opposite to the notion according to which ‘Dào’ stands for ‘Yònɡ’ [Utility], and ‘Qì’ stands for ‘Tǐ’. On the level of practice, taking ‘Xiànɡ’ [Image] as the medium, ‘Dào’ [Thing-in-itself] and ‘Qì’ [Utensils] would become fused together.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.08</doi>
          <udk>1: 62</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>The Forms of Ancient Chinese Technology</keyword>
            <keyword>‘Qì’</keyword>
            <keyword>‘Dào’</keyword>
            <keyword>‘Xiànɡ’</keyword>
            <keyword>Technology</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.8/</furl>
          <file>106-115.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>116-128</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0001-5346-0447</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Shenzhen University</orgName>
              <surname>Deng</surname>
              <initials>Pan</initials>
              <address>Shenzhen, China</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">Hegel on the Steam-Engine</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">Hegel did not witness the unveiling of the granite bowl in Berlin's city center, which was crafted and polished using steam engine technology. His comprehension of the steam engine significantly impacted the evolution of scholarly thought in Europe around 1800. While Hegel's works did not explicitly delve into the “steam engine” as a complete concept, his examination of its parts, “steam” and "machine,” was very thorough. In natural philosophy, Hegel meticulously detailed steam as an individual physical element, from the ancient Greek theory of four elements to modern meteorology. While he discussed the relationship between steam, air pressure, and heat, he did not address the perspective of the steam engine in technical applications. Instead, he continuously engaged in reflection at the scientific level of the relation between physical elements and individual objects, arising from the dynamic interaction between concepts and real-world objects within the framework of dialectics. Therefore, Hegel's understanding of the steam engine embodies his concept of “pre-scientific hermeneutics,” involving continuous reflection of concepts and reality through empirical validation. He thus drew on contemporary meteorological research to demonstrate the dialectical relationship between physical elements and individual bodies, as well as the laws of motion that constitute meteorological elements such as air and water. However, in a complex and variable climate, these motions could be transient and incidental. And so, in his exploration of the scientific principles of the “steam engine,” Hegel did not delve into the transformation of these principles into technology or the resulting revolution in social productivity and the accompanying societal ramifications.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.09</doi>
          <udk>165</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Steam</keyword>
            <keyword>Machine</keyword>
            <keyword>Atmospheric pressure</keyword>
            <keyword>Heat</keyword>
            <keyword>Dialectics</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.9/</furl>
          <file>116-128.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>129-151</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <authorCodes>
              <orcid>0000-0002-3869-1770</orcid>
            </authorCodes>
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Austrian Institute of Technology Wien, Austria &amp; Technical University Berlin, Berlin, Germany</orgName>
              <surname>Mehnert</surname>
              <initials>Wenzel</initials>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">The Futures Circle - A Framework for Hermeneutic Technology Assessment</artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">Technofutures, meaning statements about new and emerging technologies (NEST) disrupting the world as we know it, often follow a purely hypothetical and thus also speculative manner. At the same time, they shape the way we think and discuss NEST and leave an impact on the development of the actual technology. Scholars from Science and Technology Studies (STS) and Technology Assessment (TA) have turned towards technofutures as objects of interests, to better understand the content, the spreading, and the impact of techno-visionary communication. The shared characteristic of these approaches is that they view technofutures not as predictions of what may or may not happen, but as reflections of current state of affairs, i.e., compositions of existing knowledge, values, and attitudes. One of these approaches is Hermeneutic Technology Assessment (TA), which focuses on analysing how technofutures attribute meaning to NEST. This paper gives an insight into the different perspectives on technofutures and suggests a framework for the hermeneutic assessment of technofutures: The Futures Circle. The framework gives guidance through an otherwise often rather erratic research and contributes to the methodological reflection on Hermeneutic TA.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.10</doi>
          <udk>001.18: 801.73</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Hermeneutic TA</keyword>
            <keyword>Technofutures</keyword>
            <keyword>Technology Assessment</keyword>
            <keyword>Method</keyword>
            <keyword>Framework</keyword>
            <keyword>Ricoeur</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.10/</furl>
          <file>129-151.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
      <article>
        <artType>RAR</artType>
        <langPubl>RUS</langPubl>
        <pages>153-168</pages>
        <authors>
          <author num="001">
            <individInfo lang="ENG">
              <orgName>Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University</orgName>
              <surname>Mustafaev</surname>
              <initials>Elyar</initials>
              <address>St.Petersburg, Russia</address>
            </individInfo>
          </author>
        </authors>
        <artTitles>
          <artTitle lang="ENG">A Philosophical Analysis of Moral Choices in the Game The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt </artTitle>
        </artTitles>
        <abstracts>
          <abstract lang="ENG">Initially, video games that emphasized morality either had a simple measure for the level of good and evil with an unambiguous interpretation provided by the developers, or else morality was built into the plot of the game where a morally “right” or “wrong” choice led to the corresponding ending. Some more recent games, however, present a more complex and ambiguous system of moral choices. This paper conducts a philosophical analysis of moral choices in the game The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt based on a study of 100 variants of story progression. The method adopted is to analyze the content of the choices presented to the player along the course of the main plot and the side quests. The paper will then attempt to isolate recurring elements and the variety of decisions possible in the game world. The analysis revealed that 25% of the quests offer a choice between salvation and destruction, with 15% of the quests having a strong impact on the main plot of the game. Family relationships matter in 32 % of the quests, influencing the decision-making. 40% of quests involve an ethical choice between personal good and the good of others. There is no simple logic that allows the player to predict the consequences of a particular choice. The main goal of this study is to highlight the diversity of ethical concepts reflected in game scenarios, which facilitates the discussion of moral issues and ethical dilemmas in both virtual and real worlds.</abstract>
        </abstracts>
        <codes>
          <doi>10.48417/technolang.2024.01.11</doi>
          <udk>17: 004</udk>
        </codes>
        <keywords>
          <kwdGroup lang="ENG">
            <keyword>Philosophy</keyword>
            <keyword>Moral choice</keyword>
            <keyword>The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt</keyword>
            <keyword>Ethics in video games.</keyword>
          </kwdGroup>
        </keywords>
        <files>
          <furl>https://soctech.spbstu.ru/article/2024.14.11/</furl>
          <file>153-168.pdf</file>
        </files>
      </article>
    </articles>
  </issue>
</journal>
