Ethical guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence and the challenges from value conflicts

IF 0.3 4区 哲学 Q4 ETHICS Etikk I Praksis Pub Date : 2021-06-15 DOI:10.5324/eip.v15i1.3756
T. Petersen
{"title":"Ethical guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence and the challenges from value conflicts","authors":"T. Petersen","doi":"10.5324/eip.v15i1.3756","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to articulate and critically discuss different answers to the following question: How should decision-makers deal with conflicts that arise when the values usually entailed in ethical guidelines – such as accuracy, privacy, non-discrimination and transparency – for the use of Artificial Intelligence (e.g. algorithm-based sentencing) clash with one another? To begin with, I focus on clarifying some of the general advantages of using such guidelines in an ethical analysis of the use of AI. Some disadvantages will also be presented and critically discussed. Second, I will show that we need to distinguish between three kinds of conflict that can exist for ethical guidelines used in the moral assessment of AI. This section will be followed by a critical discussion of different answers to the question of how to handle what we shall call internal and external values conflicts. Finally, I will wrap up with a critical discussion of three different strategies to resolve what is called a ‘genuine value conflict’. These strategies are: the ‘accepting the existence of irresolvable conflict’ view, the ranking view, and value monism. This article defends the ‘accepting the existence of irresolvable conflict’ view. It also argues that even though the ranking view and value monism, from a merely theoretical (or philosophical) point of view, are better equipped to solve genuine value conflicts among values in ethical guidelines for artificial intelligence, this is not the case in real-life decision-making. \nKeywords: AI; ethical guidelines; algorithm-based sentencing; value conflicts","PeriodicalId":42362,"journal":{"name":"Etikk I Praksis","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Etikk I Praksis","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v15i1.3756","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The aim of this article is to articulate and critically discuss different answers to the following question: How should decision-makers deal with conflicts that arise when the values usually entailed in ethical guidelines – such as accuracy, privacy, non-discrimination and transparency – for the use of Artificial Intelligence (e.g. algorithm-based sentencing) clash with one another? To begin with, I focus on clarifying some of the general advantages of using such guidelines in an ethical analysis of the use of AI. Some disadvantages will also be presented and critically discussed. Second, I will show that we need to distinguish between three kinds of conflict that can exist for ethical guidelines used in the moral assessment of AI. This section will be followed by a critical discussion of different answers to the question of how to handle what we shall call internal and external values conflicts. Finally, I will wrap up with a critical discussion of three different strategies to resolve what is called a ‘genuine value conflict’. These strategies are: the ‘accepting the existence of irresolvable conflict’ view, the ranking view, and value monism. This article defends the ‘accepting the existence of irresolvable conflict’ view. It also argues that even though the ranking view and value monism, from a merely theoretical (or philosophical) point of view, are better equipped to solve genuine value conflicts among values in ethical guidelines for artificial intelligence, this is not the case in real-life decision-making. Keywords: AI; ethical guidelines; algorithm-based sentencing; value conflicts
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
人工智能使用的伦理准则及价值冲突带来的挑战
本文的目的是阐明和批判性地讨论以下问题的不同答案:当使用人工智能(例如基于算法的量刑)的道德准则通常涉及的价值观-例如准确性,隐私性,非歧视和透明度-相互冲突时,决策者应如何处理冲突?首先,我将重点阐明在使用人工智能的伦理分析中使用此类准则的一些一般优势。一些缺点也将被提出并批判性地讨论。其次,我将表明,我们需要区分在人工智能道德评估中使用的伦理准则可能存在的三种冲突。本节之后将对如何处理我们称之为内部和外部价值冲突的问题的不同答案进行批判性讨论。最后,我将对解决所谓“真正价值冲突”的三种不同策略进行批判性讨论。这些策略是:“接受不可解决冲突的存在”观、排名观和价值一元论。本文为“接受不可解决冲突的存在”的观点进行了辩护。它还认为,尽管从纯粹的理论(或哲学)角度来看,排名观和价值一元论更能解决人工智能伦理准则中价值观之间的真正价值冲突,但在现实生活中的决策中却并非如此。关键词:人工智能;道德准则;算法的判决;价值冲突
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Etikk I Praksis
Etikk I Praksis Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Ethical challenges of social work in Spain during COVID-19 LGBTIQ+ prioritization in refugee admissions – The case of Norway Stakeholder Inclusion as the Research Council of Norway’s Silver Bullet Moral sensitivity, moral distress and moral functioning Nazism, Genocide and the Threat of The Global West. Russian Moral Justification of War in Ukraine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1