A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

  Subjects -> SOCIOLOGY (Total: 553 journals)
The end of the list has been reached or no journals were found for your choice.
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Philosophy & Technology
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.233
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 14  
 
  Hybrid Journal Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
ISSN (Print) 2210-5433 - ISSN (Online) 2210-5441
Published by Springer-Verlag Homepage  [2467 journals]
  • Response to Emotions and Automation in a High-Tech Workplace: a Commentary

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2023-03-11
       
  • Digital Domination and the Promise of Radical Republicanism

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract In this paper, I approach the power of digital platforms by using the republican concept of domination. More specifically, I argue that the traditional, agent-relative interpretation of domination, in the case of digital domination, is best supplemented by a more radical version, on which republicans ought to give priority to structural elements. I show how radical republicanism draws attention to (1) the economic rationales and the socio-technical infrastructures that underlie and support digital platforms and to (2) the forms of influence that are directed at cognitive dimensions, such as habituation and routinisation, which are particularly relevant for the power of digital platforms. These insights also imply that republicans have reason to favour a more structural response to digital platforms over more direct and individualised forms of control that fit with a ‘standard’ republican approach, such as securing exit options and requiring user consent.
      PubDate: 2023-03-11
       
  • AI as Agency Without Intelligence: on ChatGPT, Large Language Models, and
           Other Generative Models

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2023-03-10
       
  • The Right Not to Be Subjected to AI Profiling Based on Publicly Available
           Data—Privacy and the Exceptionalism of AI Profiling

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract Social media data hold considerable potential for predicting health-related conditions. Recent studies suggest that machine-learning models may accurately predict depression and other mental health-related conditions based on Instagram photos and Tweets. In this article, it is argued that individuals should have a sui generis right not to be subjected to AI profiling based on publicly available data without their explicit informed consent. The article (1) develops three basic arguments for a right to protection of personal data trading on the notions of social control and stigmatization, (2) argues that a number of features of AI profiling make individuals more exposed to social control and stigmatization than other types of data processing (the exceptionalism of AI profiling), (3) considers a series of other reasons for and against protecting individuals against AI profiling based on publicly available data, and finally (4) argues that the EU General Data Protection Regulation does not ensure that individuals have a right not to be AI profiled based on publicly available data.
      PubDate: 2023-03-07
       
  • Emotions and Automation in a High-Tech Workplace: a Commentary

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract In a recent article, Madelaine Ley evaluates the future of work, specifically robotised workplaces, via the lens of care ethics. Like many proponents of care ethics, Ley draws on the approach and its emphasis on relationality to understand ethical action necessary for worker wellbeing. Her paper aims to fill a research gap by shifting away from the traditional contexts in which care ethics is employed, i.e., health and care contexts and instead appropriates the approach to tackle the sociotechnicity of robotics and how caring should be integrated into non-traditional contexts. This paper comments on that of Ley’s, making the case that the author does, in fact, achieve this end while still leaving areas of potential future research open to buttressing the approach she presents.
      PubDate: 2023-03-02
       
  • The Metaverse: Surveillant Physics, Virtual Realist Governance, and the
           Missing Commons

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract This paper argues that there are value and design-based problems in current ambitions for the Metaverse. With the Metaverse deepening longstanding commercial surveillance practices, the paper focuses on data protection harms from biometric and emotion data, the gauging of first-person perspectives, and sensitivities around profiling of avatars. The paper advances two notions to address harms and data protection: surveillant physics and virtual realist governance. Surveillant physics refers to surveillance informing the laws of how that reality operates: this is a useful concept given the granular control that platforms have over virtual worlds and the laws by which they function. Virtual realist governance builds on the longstanding principle of virtual realism and David Chalmer’s recent theorising of Reality+ that demands that the virtual is taken to be real, meaning that experiences of virtual objects and what occurs in-world are treated as meaningful. The paper progresses to further consider governance questions, both around technical and ethical standards, but also data protection ideas such as personal data stores, and data trusts, that were not conceived as Metaverse-based ideas, but have greater chance of being realised as basic premises of the Metaverse are being designed. Although this paper is regretfully pessimistic, finding that a root problem of current ambitions for the Metaverse is that the public good and the commons are missing, it sees virtual realist scope for modes of resistance unseen in other digital realms.
      PubDate: 2023-03-02
       
  • Correction to: Escaping the Impossibility of Fairness: From Formal to
           Substantive Algorithmic Fairness

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2023-02-23
       
  • Why Should We Care About the Manipulative Power of Algorithmic
           Transparency'

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract Franke Philosophy & Technology, 35(4), 1-7, (2022) offers an interesting claim that algorithmic transparency as manipulation does not necessarily follow that it is good or bad. Different people can have good reasons to adopt different evaluative attitudes towards this manipulation. Despite agreeing with some of his observations, this short reply will examine three crucial misconceptions in his arguments. In doing so, it defends why we are morally obliged to care about the manipulative potential of algorithmic transparency. It suggests that we as society have a moral duty to incorporate the value of transparency into algorithmic systems while keeping algorithmic transparency itself sensitive to power relations.
      PubDate: 2023-02-15
       
  • Divide and Rule' Why Ethical Proliferation is not so Wrong for
           Technology Ethics

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract Although the map of technology ethics is expanding, the growing subdomains within it may raise misgivings. In a recent and very interesting article, Sætra and Danaher have argued that the current dynamic of sub-specialization is harmful to the ethics of technology. In this commentary, we offer three reasons to diminish their concern about ethical proliferation. We argue first that the problem of demarcation is weakened if we attend to other sub-disciplines of technology ethics not mentioned by these authors. We claim secondly that the logic of sub-specializations is less problematic if one does adopt mixed models (combining internalist and externalist approaches) in applied ethics. We finally reject that clarity and distinction are necessary conditions for defining sub-fields within ethics of technology, defending the porosity and constructive nature of ethical disciplines.
      PubDate: 2023-02-15
       
  • Prediction via Similarity: Biomedical Big Data and the Case of Cancer
           Models

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract In recent years, the biomedical field has witnessed the emergence of novel tools and modelling techniques driven by the rise of the so-called Big Data. In this paper, we address the issue of predictability in biomedical Big Data models of cancer patients, with the aim of determining the extent to which computationally driven predictions can be implemented by medical doctors in their clinical practice. We show that for a specific class of approaches, called k-Nearest Neighbour algorithms, the ability to draw predictive inferences relies on a geometrical, or topological, notion of similarity encoded in a well-defined metric, which determines how close the characteristics of distinct patients are on average. We then discuss the conditions under which the relevant models can yield reliable and trustworthy predictive outcomes.
      PubDate: 2023-01-26
       
  • Care Ethics and the Future of Work: a Different Voice

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract The discourse on the future of work should learn from a turn in philosophy that occurred in the 1980s, one that recognizes the good life towards which ethics strives can only be reached on a foundation of caring relationships (Gillian, 1982; Noddings, 1984). Care ethics recognizes that human well-being is a group project, one that involves strong relationships, and concern for bodies and emotions. Too often, these features are left out of research exploring robotics in the workplace. This paper outlines the main tenets of care ethics, then applies the moral framework to the context of industrial and retail settings using robots. This approach sees these contexts through a relational lens, helping to identify, evaluate, and improve relationships critical to ensuring workers’ well-being. Second, care ethics considers taking care of people’s bodies beyond mere safety, examining how working with robots can exacerbate societal or economic pressures. Lastly, care ethics takes emotions as an important source of knowledge in building and supporting care. Additionally, this paper contributes to the care ethics literature by applying the framework to the context of robotized industrial workplaces, which has yet to be done.
      PubDate: 2023-01-26
       
  • Egalitarianism and Algorithmic Fairness

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract What does it mean for algorithmic classifications to be fair to different socially salient groups' According to classification parity criteria, what is required is equality across groups with respect to some performance measure such as error rates. Critics of classification parity object that classification parity entails that achieving fairness may require us to choose an algorithm that makes no group better off and some groups worse off than an alternative. In this article, I interpret the problem of algorithmic fairness as a case concerning the ethics of the distribution of algorithmic classifications across groups (as opposed to, e.g., the fairness of data collection). I begin with a short introduction of algorithmic fairness as a problem discussed in machine learning. I then show how the criticism raised against classification parity is a form of leveling down objection, and I interpret the egalitarianism of classification parity as deontic egalitarianism. I then discuss a challenge to this interpretation and suggest a revision. Finally, I examine how my interpretation provides proponents of classification parity with a response to the leveling down criticism and how it relates to a recent suggestion to evaluate fairness for automated decision-making systems based on risk and welfare considerations from behind a veil of ignorance.
      PubDate: 2023-01-19
       
  • Correction to: The Responsibility Gap and LAWS: a Critical Mapping of the
           Debate

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2023-01-18
       
  • Justifying a Capability Approach to Brain Computer Interface

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract Previously, we introduced a capability approach to assess the responsible use of brain-computer interface. In this commentary, we say more about the ethical basis of our capability view and respond to three objections. The first objection holds that by stressing that capability lists are provisional and subject to change, we threaten the persistence of human dignity, which is tied to capabilities. The second objection states that we conflate capabilities and abilities. The third objection claims that the goal of using neuroenhancements should be preserving capabilities, not altering them.
      PubDate: 2023-01-07
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00603-6
       
  • The Responsibility Gap and LAWS: a Critical Mapping of the Debate

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract AI has numerous applications and in various fields, including the military domain. The increase in the degree of autonomy in some decision-making systems leads to discussions on the possible future use of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS). A central issue in these discussions is the assignment of moral responsibility for some AI-based outcomes. Several authors claim that the high autonomous capability of such systems leads to a so-called “responsibility gap.” In recent years, there has been a surge in philosophical literature around the concept of responsibility gaps and different solutions have been devised to close or bridge these gaps. In order to move forward in the research around LAWS and the problem of responsibility, it is important to increase our understanding of the different perspectives and discussions in this debate. This paper attempts to do so by disentangling the various arguments and providing a critical overview. After giving a brief outline of the state of the technology of LAWS, I will review the debates over responsibility gaps using three differentiators: those who believe in the existence of responsibility gaps versus those who do not, those who hold that responsibility gaps constitute a new moral problem versus those who argue they do not, and those who claim that solutions can be successful as opposed to those who believe that it is an unsolvable problem.
      PubDate: 2023-01-05
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00602-7
       
  • Climate Change and the Terrible Hope

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2022-12-23
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00601-8
       
  • Abilities, Capabilities, and Brain-Computer Interfaces: a Response to
           Jecker and Ko

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract In a recent article, Jecker and Ko propose that a capabilities approach can be useful as an ethical framework for evaluating the use of BCI applications. Jecker and Ko defend this application, in part, because a capabilities list is not necessarily unchanging, but can account for rapid enhancements in human abilities. In this commentary, I argue that, though the capabilities approach is provisional, its primary relevance for BCI emerges from the ways in which capabilities remain constant amidst changing human abilities.
      PubDate: 2022-12-16
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00600-9
       
  • HoloFoldit and Hologrammatically Extended Cognition

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      Abstract: Abstract How does the integration of mixed reality devices into our cognitive practices impact the mind from a metaphysical and epistemological perspective' In his innovative and interdisciplinary article, “Minds in the Metaverse: Extended Cognition Meets Mixed Reality” (2022), Paul Smart addresses this underexplored question, arguing that the use of a hypothetical application of the Microsoft HoloLens called “the HoloFoldit” represents a technologically high-grade form of extended cognizing from the perspective of neo-mechanical philosophy. This short commentary aims to (1) carve up the conceptual landscape of possible objections to Smart’s argument and (2) elaborate on the possibility of hologrammatically extended cognition, which is supposed to be one of the features of the HoloFoldit case that distinguishes it from more primitive forms of cognitive extension. In tackling (1), I do not mean to suggest that Smart does not consider or have sufficient answers to these objections. In addressing (2), the goal is not to argue for or against the possibility of hologrammatically extended cognition but to reveal some issues in the metaphysics of virtual reality upon which this possibility hinges. I construct an argument in favor of hologrammatically extended cognition based on the veracity of virtual realism (Chalmers, 2017) and an argument against it based on the veracity of virtual fictionalism (McDonnell and Wildman, 2019).
      PubDate: 2022-12-15
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00596-2
       
  • Correction to: On Making Phenomenologies of Technology More
           Phenomenological

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2022-12-14
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00594-4
       
  • Correction to: Technology as Driver for Morally Motivated Conceptual
           Engineering

    • Free pre-print version: Loading...

      PubDate: 2022-12-14
      DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00592-6
       
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
 


Your IP address: 3.236.24.215
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-