Petros Terzis
ABSTRACT
The debate on the ethics of Artificial Intelligence brought together different stakeholders including but not limited to academics, policymakers, CEOs, activists, workers' representatives, lobbyists, journalists, and 'moral machines'. Prominent political institutions crafted principles for the 'ethical being' of the AI companies while tech giants were documenting ethics in a series of self-written guidelines. In parallel, a large community started to flourish, focusing on how to technically embed ethical parameters into algorithmic systems. Founded upon the philosophical work of Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre, this paper explores the philosophical antinomies of the 'AI Ethics' debate as well as the conceptual disorientation of the 'fairness discussion'. By bringing the philosophy of existentialism to the dialogue, this paper attempts to challenge the dialectical monopoly of utilitarianism and sheds fresh light on the -already glaring- AI arena. Why is 'the AI Ethics guidelines' a futile battle doomed to dangerous abstraction? How this battle can harm our sense of collective freedom? Which is the uncomfortable reality that remains obscured by the smoke-gas of the 'AI Ethics' discussion? And eventually, what's the alternative? There seems to be a different pathway for discussing and implementing ethics; A pathway that sets the freedom of others at the epicenter of the battle for a sustainable and open to all future.
- Philippe D'Anjou. 2011. An Ethics of Freedom for Architectural Design Practice. Journal of Architectural Education 64, 2, (March 2011), 141--147. Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Simone de Beauvoir. 1947 (New ed. 2002). The Ethics of Ambiguity. Kensington Publishing.Google Scholar
- Simone de Beauvoir. 1965 (New ed. 1987). The Force of Circumstance. Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
- Alex Campolo, Madelyn Sanfilippo, Meredith Whittaker, Kate Crawford. AI Now Report. 2017. Retrieved December 4, 2018 from: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/eu-guidelines-ethics-washing-made-in-europe/24195496.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Thomas Flynn. 2006. Existentialism: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Antonio Gramsci. 1935 (New ed. 2005). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. Lawrence & Wishart LtdGoogle Scholar
- Ben Green. 2018. Data Science as Political Action: Grounding Data Science in a Politics of Justice. arXiv: arXiv:1811.03435. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.03435v1Google Scholar
- Martin Heidegger. 1927 (rev.ed. 2010). Being and Time: A Revised Edition of the Stambaugh Translation. State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
- Kevin T. Jackson. 2005. Towards Authenticity: A Sartrean Perspective on Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 58, 1 (June 2005). 307--325Google ScholarCross Ref
- Herbert Marcuse. 1964. One-dimensional Man. Routledge & Kegan Paul Limited.Google Scholar
- Thomas Metzinger. 2019. Ethics washing made in Europe (April 2019). Retrieved December 4, 2018 from: https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/eu-guidelines-ethics-washing-made-in-europe/24195496.htmlGoogle Scholar
- Samir Passi and Solon Barocas. 2019. Problem Formulation and Fairness. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 39--48. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Microsoft Research Blog. Guidelines for Human-AI interaction design, (February 2019), Retrieved December 4, 2018 from: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/guidelines-for-human-ai-interaction-design/Google Scholar
- Jean-Paul Sartre. 1943 (2nd ed. 2003) Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Jean-Paul Sartre. 1946. Existentialism Is a Humanism. Public lecture given in 1946. Retrieved December 4, 2019 from: http://www.mrsmoser.com/uploads/8/5/0/1/8501319/english_11_ib_-_no_exit_-_existentialism_is_a_humanism_-_sartre.pdfGoogle Scholar
- Andrew D. Selbst, Danah Boyd, Sorelle A. Friedler, Suresh Venkatasubramanian, and Janet Vertesi. 2019. Fairness and Abstraction in Sociotechnical Systems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAT* '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 59--68. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Julia Powles and Helen Nissenbaum. 2018. The Seductive Diversion of 'Solving' Bias in Artificial Intelligence (December 2018). Retrieved December 4, 2018 from: https://onezero.medium.com/the-seductive-diversion-of-solving-bias-in-artificial-intelligence-890df5e5ef53Google Scholar
- Edward Zalta (Ed.). 2017. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2017). Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/existentialism/Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Onward for the freedom of others: marching beyond the AI ethics
Recommendations
Enter the metrics: critical theory and organizational operationalization of AI ethics
AbstractAs artificial intelligence (AI) deployment is growing exponentially, questions have been raised whether the developed AI ethics discourse is apt to address the currently pressing questions in the field. Building on critical theory, this article ...
Teaching philosophy to engineering students
FIE'09: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE international conference on Frontiers in education conferenceThe intention of this paper is to accompany the two special sessions on teaching philosophy in engineering courses as a vehicle for reflection on the subject matter of these sessions.
In recent years there have been substantial international discussions ...
Robots, ethics and language
Special Issue on EthicompFollowing the classical philosophical definition of ethics and the psychological research on problem solving and decision making, the issue of ethics becomes concrete and opens up the way for the creation of IT systems that can support handling of moral ...
Comments