Abstract
AbstractCultural differences pose a serious challenge to the ethics and governance of artificial intelligence (AI) from a global perspective. Cultural differences may enable malignant actors to disregard the demand of important ethical values or even to justify the violation of them through deference to the local culture, either by affirming the local culture lacks specific ethical values, e.g., privacy, or by asserting the local culture upholds conflicting values, e.g., state intervention is good. One response to this challenge is the human rights approach to AI governance, which is intended to be a universal and globally enforceable framework. The proponents of the approach, however, have so far neglected the challenge from cultural differences or left out the implications of cultural diversity in their works. This is surprising because human rights theorists have long recognized the significance of cultural pluralism for human rights. Accordingly, the approach may not be straightforwardly applicable in “non-Western” contexts because of cultural differences, and it may also be critiqued as philosophically incomplete insofar as the approach does not account for the (non-) role of culture. This commentary examines the human rights approach to AI governance with an emphasis on cultural values and the role of culture. Particularly, I show that the consideration of cultural values is essential to the human rights approach for both philosophical and instrumental reasons.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy
Reference37 articles.
1. Access Now. (2018). Human rights in the age of artificial intelligence. Available Online at: https://www.accessnow.org/cms/assets/uploads/2018/11/AI-and-Human-Rights.pdf.
2. AI HLEG [High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence]. (2019). Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. Available Online at: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/ethics-guidelines-trustworthy-ai.
3. Angle, S. (2015). Virtue ethics, the rule of law, and the need for self-restriction. In B. Bruya (Ed.), The philosophical challenge from China (pp. 159–182). Cambridge: MIT Press.
4. ARTICLE 19. (2019). Governance with teeth: How human rights can strengthen FAT and ethics initiatives on artificial intelligence. Available Online at: https://www.article19.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Governance-with-teeth_A19_April_2019.pdf.
5. Ashesh, A. & Acharya, B. (2014). Locating constructs of privacy within classical Hindu law. The Centre for Internet and Society. https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/loading-constructs-of-privacy-within-classical-hindu-law
Cited by
32 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