Abstract
AbstractThose who claim, whether with fear or with hope, that algorithmic governance can control politics or the whole political process or that artificial intelligence is capable of taking charge of or wrecking democracy, recognize that this is not yet possible with our current technological capabilities but that it could come about in the future if we had better quality data or more powerful computational tools. Those who fear or desire this algorithmic suppression of democracy assume that something similar will be possible someday and that it is only a question of technological progress. If that were the case, no limits would be insurmountable on principle. I want to challenge that conception with a limit that is less normative than epistemological; there are things that artificial intelligence cannot do, because it is unable to do them, not because it should not do them, and this is particularly apparent in politics, which is a peculiar decision-making realm. Machines and people take decisions in a very different fashion. Human beings are particularly gifted at one type of situation and very clumsy in others. The part of politics that is, strictly speaking, political is where this contrast and our greatest aptitude are most apparent. If that is the case, as I believe, then the possibility that democracy will one day be taken over by artificial intelligence is, as a fear or as a desire, manifestly exaggerated. The corresponding counterpart to this is: if the fear that democracy could disappear at the hands of artificial intelligence is not realistic, then we should not expect exorbitant benefits from it either. For epistemic reasons that I will explain, it does not seem likely that artificial intelligence is capable of taking over political logic.
Funder
European University Institute - Fiesole
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Artificial Intelligence,Human-Computer Interaction,Philosophy
Reference13 articles.
1. Bächle TC (2016) Digitales Wissen. Daten und Überwachung zur Einführung, Junius, Hamburg
2. Becker C, Seubert, S (2020) “Die Selbstgefährdung der Autonomie. Eckpunkte einer Kritischen Theorie der Privatheit im digitalen Zeitalter”. In: Kruse JP, Müller-Mall S (eds) Digitale Transformationen der Öffentlichkeit, Velbrück Wissenschaft, Weilersvist
3. Dennett DC (2006) Cognitive wheels. The frame problem of AI. In: Ford KM, Glymour J, Hayes P (eds) Thinking About Android Epistemology. MIT Press, pp 147–169
4. Herzog L (2021) Algorithmisches Entscheiden, Ambiguitätstoleranz und die Frage nach dem Sinn. Deut Z Philos 69(2):197–213
5. Koster A-K (2021) Das Ende der Politischen? Demokratische Politik und Künstliche Intelligenz. Zeitschrift Für Politikwissenschaft. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41358-021-00280-5
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献