Search results

In this chapter, we introduce the concept of techno-constructionism that identifies with the Technical Construction of Reality (TCR) suggesting the replacement of mere constructivism or Social Construction of Reality. We discuss of course the idea of a theoretical investigation of the lifeworld or Lebenswelt through the lens of technology. Today, we are witnessing technology prevailing on most important functions and systems that were previously done in a completely different way and logic. Rapid advances in computer science have made engineering a dynamically expanding industry that has infiltrated all areas of social life. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based applications are not merely technical, but also cultural and ethical (regarding values). A new perception of reality emerges that ostracizes all kind of societal entities and human communities and alter even lifeworld itself, transforming it into a tech-lifeworld (a Technik-Lebenswelt). Against this perspective, it is important to identify and address the ethical challenges that the unavoidable evolution of technology will bring forward.

Outer space has been described as a liminal landscape. As such, it appears to have an intricate connection to the concept of the monster, which is a powerful metaphor that reflects and demarcates the culture that constructs it. In this vein, the scientific search for extraterrestrial life has been previously argued to possess characteristics of monstrosity. Consequently, the object of this search, that is, alien life, also bears the mark of the monster, as it can effortlessly tap into the particular leitmotifs of the monstrous that are largely constant across cultures, despite the situatedness of the monster. This foreshadows a risk of monsterization of the parties involved in a future discovery of extraterrestrial life, that is, the monsterization of both the humans and the extraterrestrial life. In turn, this can adversely affect moral appraisals in future encounters with extraterrestrial life by rendering theoretical ethical approaches ineffective, as monsters are not only always outside the moral order but essentially defy and transgress it. Grounded on the intertwinement of moral imagination and anticipation and drawing on the inherent educational power of monsters, this chapter offers a theoretical exploration and a practical intervention in the form of a novel futures literacy workshop to help pre-emptively decrease the potential for the monsterization of humans and extraterrestrial life in the case of a future discovery. This contribution is in line with pragmatist ethics and is envisioned as a preparatory, complementary pedagogical approach to the traditional teaching of ethical theories and applied ethics to university students.

The aim of this chapter is to explore the safety value of implementing Asimov's Laws of Robotics as a future general framework that humans should obey. Asimov formulated laws to make explicit the safeguards of the robots in his stories: (1) A robot may not injure or harm a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm; (2) A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law; (3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. In Asimov's stories, it is always assumed that the laws are built into the robots to govern the behaviour of the robots. As his stories clearly demonstrate, the Laws can be ambiguous. Moreover, the laws are not very specific. General rules as a guide for robot behaviour may not be a very good method to achieve robot safety – if we expect the robots to follow them. But would it work for humans? In this chapter, we ask whether it would make as much, or more, sense to implement the laws in human legislation with the purpose of governing the behaviour of people or companies that develop, build, market or use AI, embodied in robots or in the form of software, now and in the future.

This chapter explores the ethical challenges arising from the integration of advanced artificial intelligence (AI) technologies into intelligent manufacturing systems. Machine learning (ML), augmented reality/virtual reality (AR/VR), digital twins, and human–robot collaboration (HRC) redefine industrial production, they bring forth unprecedented efficiencies and capabilities but also introduce complex ethical considerations. The text delves into issues such as data privacy, job displacement, the impact of automation on workforce dynamics, and the psychological effects of working alongside AI-powered systems. Through a detailed examination of these technologies and their implications, the chapter advocates for a dynamic ethical framework that evolves alongside technological advancements. This framework should prioritize human dignity, safety, and rights, involving all stakeholders in its development and implementation. By addressing the ethical implications of AI, AR/VR, digital twins, and HRC, the chapter underscores the necessity of balancing technological innovation with ethical responsibility. It calls for collaborative efforts involving policymakers, industry leaders, workers, and consumers to navigate the ethical landscape of intelligent manufacturing, aiming to harness the potential of these technologies responsibly for the betterment of society and the workforce.

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly within the last decade and the application of ‘deep learning’, has simultaneously accelerated human fears of the changes AI provokes in human behaviour. The question is not any more if the new phenomena, like artificially-induced consciousness, empathy or creation, will be widely used, but whether they will be used in ethically acceptable ways and for ethically acceptable purposes.

Departing from a diagnosis of the state humans have brought themselves to by (ab)use of technology, the present chapter investigates the possibility of a systematic study of adaptations human society will have to consider in order to guarantee the obeyance to the fundamental ethical values and thus its spiritual survival. To that end, a new discipline – epharmology (from the Greek epharmozein = to adapt) is proposed, together with its aims and methodology.

One of the more plausible methods of establishing an off-world human society is to transport a small number of adults alongside a large supply of frozen embryos. This would minimize the costs of transportation and protect genomic diversity across future generations. However, there are various ethical issues with attempting off-world pregnancies, in terms of unknown risks to pregnant people and fetuses, and potential discrimination concerns if the adults selected for the mission are required to be willing and able to gestate this genetically diverse population of embryos. An alternative would be the development and use of artificial womb technology (ectogenesis) to perform this latter function. Benefits might include freeing all crewmembers to devote all their energies to establishing the off-world facility without pregnancy-related illness affecting health and productivity, and providing a safer environment for fetal development, for example, providing additional radiation shielding around the artificial wombs. This chapter will explore some of the ethical issues surrounding ectogenesis and its space applications.

As artificial intelligence and machine learning become increasingly integrated into daily life, both individuals and institutions are growing dependent on these technologies. However, it's crucial to acknowledge that such advancements can introduce potential flaws or vulnerabilities. A case in point is the investigation conducted by the non-profit organization ProPublica into the COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Sanctions) risk assessment tool – a tool widely used by US courts to assess the likelihood of a defendant reoffending. To address the issue of underlying biases, including racial biases, which can lead to inaccurate predictions and significant social harm, we are delving into the current literature on algorithmic bias in decision systems. We are also exploring the evolving considerations of fairness and accountability in machine learning. Specifically, within the realm of predictive policing algorithms employed in the criminal justice system, our focus is on recent studies aimed at mitigating biases in algorithmic decision-making. This involves reassessing recidivism rates and implementing adversarial debiasing in conjunction with fairness metrics.

Perverse instantiation is one of many hypothetical failure modes of AI, specifically one in which the AI fulfils the command given to it by its principal in a way which is both unforeseen and harmful. A lot is already said about perverse instantiation itself, especially when such a failure mode presents an existential risk, as would be the case with a superintelligent AI. However novel these disaster scenarios may be, similar fictional cautionary tales already exist in many cultures: tragic stories about misinterpreted prophecies and grand wishes gone awry, from Croesus to Macbeth. Analysis of both old and new tales of perverse instantiation reveals that the core of the issue is an ancient philosophical and logical problem that even Socrates faced: the problem of defining terms. Unlike the Socratic problem, which focused on finding a good intensional definition, perverse instantiation encompasses problems that arise from both badly defined intension of terms (their internal content) and badly defined extension of terms (their range of applicability). However, models of machine learning that use vast amounts of training data hold the promise of resolving the issue of badly defined extension of terms. The issue of defining intension of terms remains. Further parallels can be found between scenarios of perverse instantiation and Socrates' dialogues with obstinate sophists, such as importance of philosophical reflection and discussion. This indicates that our future challenges in working with AI may still have a lot to do with retracing Socrates' steps.