Search results

This study aims to explore art workshops for people living with dementia as a process enabling creative expression and fostering communication with others.

To enable detailed exploration of the expressive powers of painting and drawing, the authors draw several examples from a series of painting workshops for people living with dementia, which formed part of the PPI for research into experiences of restraint within care.

Artwork enabled personal expression, facilitated conversation with others and revealed hidden knowledge and abilities, but also revealed dangers of miscommunication, specifically here related to technological changes and spirituality.

Individual differences in responses to painting will exist meaning that the specific findings outlined here are unique to individuals and not always generalisable. This follows from the quality of the individual communication that may be enabled by painting, meaning that close attention to each person is both fostered and required.

Art activities can provide a means to enable deep personal expression and agency in people living with dementia, which can contribute to countering dehumanisation.

Attention to the process of painting can be beneficial in fostering verbal and non-verbal communication with individuals who have difficulties in communication. Attention to cultural issues in care needs to incorporate understanding of spiritual and religious issues and take note of gaps in understanding related to technological as well as cultural changes between generations.

Much work in this area explores art activities for people living with dementia in terms of beneficial outcomes. This work explores the creative process inherent in painting, drawing upon insights from art theory and providing in-depth individual insights through case studies. Both researchers in this study are artists and the work drew upon their understanding of the processes of painting.

The supposedly radical development of artificial intelligence (AI) has raised questions regarding the moral responsibility of it. In the sphere of business, they are translated into questions about AI and business ethics (BE) and corporate social responsibility (CSR). The purpos of this study is to conceptually reformulate these questions from the point of view of two possible aspect-changes, namely, starting from corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) and starting not from AIs incapability for responsibility but from its ability to imitate human CSR without performing typical human CSI.

The author draws upon the literature and his previous works on the relationship between AI and human CSI. This comparison aims to remodel the understanding of human CSI and AIs inability to be CSI. The conceptual remodelling is offered by taking a negative view on the relation. If AI can be made not to perform human-like CSI, then AI is at least less CSI than humans. For this task, it is necessary to remodel human and AI CSR, but AI does not have to be CSR. It is sufficient that it can be less CSI than humans to be more CSR.

The previously suggested remodelling of basic concepts in question leads to the conclusion that it is not impossible for AI to act or operate more CSI then humans simply by not making typical human CSIs. Strictly speaking, AI is not CSR because it cannot be responsible as humans can. If it can perform actions with a significantly lesser amount of CSI in comparison to humans, it is certainly less CSI.

This paper is only a conceptual remodelling and a suggestion of a research hypothesis. As such, it implies particular morality, ethics and the concepts of CSI and AI.

How this remodelling could be done in practice is an issue of future research.

The author delivers the paper on comparison between human and AI CSI which is not much discussed in literature.