Abstract
AbstractThe ongoing conversation on AI ethics and politics is in full swing and has spread to the general public. Rather than contributing by engaging with the issues and views discussed, we want to step back and comment on the widening conversation itself. We consider evolved human cognitive tendencies and biases, and how they frame and hinder the conversation on AI ethics. Primarily, we describe our innate human capacities known as folk theories and how we apply them to phenomena of different implicit categories. Through examples and empirical findings, we show that such tendencies specifically affect the key issues discussed in AI ethics. The central claim is that much of our mostly opaque intuitive thinking has not evolved to match the nature of AI, and this causes problems in democratizing AI ethics and politics. Developing awareness of how our intuitive thinking affects our more explicit views will add to the quality of the conversation.
Funder
Jane ja Aatos Erkon Säätiö
Academy of Finland
University of Helsinki including Helsinki University Central Hospital
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference187 articles.
1. Agrawal, S., Williams, M.A.: Robot authority and human obedience: A study of human behaviour using a robot security guard. In: Proceedings of the companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 57–58 (2017)
2. Agrawal, A., McHale, J., Oettl, A.: Finding Needles in Haystacks: Artificial Intelligence and Recombinant Growth (No. w24541). National Bureau of Economic Research (2018)
3. Aluja, A., Garcı́a, O., Garcı́a, L.F.: Relationships among extraversion, openness to experience, and sensation seeking. Personality Individ. Differ. 35(3), 671–680 (2003)
4. Amiot, C.E., Bastian, B.: Toward a psychology of human-animal relations. Psychol. Bull. 141(1), 6–47 (2015)
5. Atran, S.: Modular and cultural factors in biological understanding: an experimental approach to the cognitive basis of science. In: Carruthers, P., Stich, S., Siegal, M. (eds.) The cognitive basis of science, 41–72. Cambridge University Press (2002)
Cited by
6 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