Political philosophy of technology: a response to Doezema et al. on the future of responsible innovation in a multipolar world

Journal of Responsible Innovation. 2026. Vol. 13. No. 1. Article 2677286.

Alexander V. Mikhailovsky

This article examines a paradigm shift within Responsible (Research and) Innovation (R(R)I) scholarship towards a more profound political-philosophical and ontological critique. Engaging with the articles of Doezema and Frahm (2023), Penttilä (2024), and Braun (2024), from the collection on “Critique in, for, with, and of Responsible Innovation”, this response substantiates the thesis that institutionalized RI has failed to achieve its transformative potential, often legitimizing the existing technoscientific order rather than challenging it. The response highlights a central “deficit of the political” in current STI governance models. It proposes supplementing R(R)I with a political philosophy of technology that prioritizes concepts like “pluriverse” or “technodiversity.” This move is essential to overcome normative universalism by adapting R(R)I to the diverse sociocultural realities, competing value systems and ontological assemblages of a multipolar world, as evidenced by localized developments in China and Russia.

Keywords: political philosophy, философия техники, responsible innovation, социальная оценка техники, technology assessment, multipolar world, многополярный мир, Political philosophy of technology, Политическая философия техники, ответственные исследования и инновации, искусственный интеллект, техноразнообразие, плюриверсум