新技术、精神病学和法律:恐慌、谨慎、可能性

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q1 LAW International Journal of Law and Psychiatry Pub Date : 2024-03-23 DOI:10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.101984
Brendan D. Kelly
{"title":"新技术、精神病学和法律:恐慌、谨慎、可能性","authors":"Brendan D. Kelly","doi":"10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.101984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Throughout human history, all new technology has been met with surprise, anxiety, panic, and – eventually – prudent adoption of certain aspects of specific technological advances. This pattern is evident in the histories of most technologies, ranging from steam power in the nineteenth century, to television in the twentieth century, and – now – ‘artificial intelligence’ (AI) in the twenty-first century. Each generation believes that the technological advances of its era are quantitatively and qualitatively different to those of previous generations, but the underlying phenomenon is the same: the shock of the new, followed by more gradual adjustment to (and of) new technology. These concerns are apparent today in relation to AI, which reflects interesting but incremental advances on existing technologies, rather than stand-alone developments. The usual concerns with all technologies (e.g., that they will replace certain aspects of human function) are, perhaps, more concerning in fields such as mental capacity law, which often applies to people with impaired decision-making capacity who might be especially vulnerable to technologies which appear capable of encroaching disproportionately on decision-making or other areas of core human function. This paper approaches this topic from an historical standpoint, noting both previous technological panics in the past and the possibilities offered by AI today, provided it is approached in a proportionate, prudent, and person-centered way, underpinned by appropriate ethical guidance and active ethical awareness in clinical and legal practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47930,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000335/pdfft?md5=71715baacf1ce624290e2dd96b2e165a&pid=1-s2.0-S0160252724000335-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New technology, psychiatry, and the law: Panic, prudence, possibility\",\"authors\":\"Brendan D. Kelly\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijlp.2024.101984\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Throughout human history, all new technology has been met with surprise, anxiety, panic, and – eventually – prudent adoption of certain aspects of specific technological advances. This pattern is evident in the histories of most technologies, ranging from steam power in the nineteenth century, to television in the twentieth century, and – now – ‘artificial intelligence’ (AI) in the twenty-first century. Each generation believes that the technological advances of its era are quantitatively and qualitatively different to those of previous generations, but the underlying phenomenon is the same: the shock of the new, followed by more gradual adjustment to (and of) new technology. These concerns are apparent today in relation to AI, which reflects interesting but incremental advances on existing technologies, rather than stand-alone developments. The usual concerns with all technologies (e.g., that they will replace certain aspects of human function) are, perhaps, more concerning in fields such as mental capacity law, which often applies to people with impaired decision-making capacity who might be especially vulnerable to technologies which appear capable of encroaching disproportionately on decision-making or other areas of core human function. This paper approaches this topic from an historical standpoint, noting both previous technological panics in the past and the possibilities offered by AI today, provided it is approached in a proportionate, prudent, and person-centered way, underpinned by appropriate ethical guidance and active ethical awareness in clinical and legal practice.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000335/pdfft?md5=71715baacf1ce624290e2dd96b2e165a&pid=1-s2.0-S0160252724000335-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000335\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Law and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160252724000335","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

纵观人类历史,所有新技术的出现都伴随着惊喜、焦虑、恐慌,以及最终谨慎地采用特定技术进步的某些方面。从十九世纪的蒸汽动力到二十世纪的电视,再到现在二十一世纪的 "人工智能"(AI),大多数技术的发展史都体现了这种模式。每一代人都认为,他们所处时代的技术进步在数量和质量上都与前几代人不同,但基本现象是相同的:新技术带来的冲击,随后是对新技术的逐步适应。这些担忧在今天的人工智能领域也很明显,人工智能反映了现有技术的有趣但渐进的进步,而不是独立的发展。对所有技术的通常担忧(例如,它们将取代人类功能的某些方面)在精神行为能力法等领域可能更令人担忧,因为这些法律通常适用于决策能力受损的人,他们可能特别容易受到技术的影响,而这些技术似乎能够过度侵蚀决策或人类核心功能的其他领域。本文从历史的角度来探讨这一话题,既指出了过去的技术恐慌,也指出了今天人工智能所带来的可能性,前提是在临床和法律实践中以适当的伦理指导和积极的伦理意识为支撑,以适度、审慎和以人为本的方式来对待人工智能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
New technology, psychiatry, and the law: Panic, prudence, possibility

Throughout human history, all new technology has been met with surprise, anxiety, panic, and – eventually – prudent adoption of certain aspects of specific technological advances. This pattern is evident in the histories of most technologies, ranging from steam power in the nineteenth century, to television in the twentieth century, and – now – ‘artificial intelligence’ (AI) in the twenty-first century. Each generation believes that the technological advances of its era are quantitatively and qualitatively different to those of previous generations, but the underlying phenomenon is the same: the shock of the new, followed by more gradual adjustment to (and of) new technology. These concerns are apparent today in relation to AI, which reflects interesting but incremental advances on existing technologies, rather than stand-alone developments. The usual concerns with all technologies (e.g., that they will replace certain aspects of human function) are, perhaps, more concerning in fields such as mental capacity law, which often applies to people with impaired decision-making capacity who might be especially vulnerable to technologies which appear capable of encroaching disproportionately on decision-making or other areas of core human function. This paper approaches this topic from an historical standpoint, noting both previous technological panics in the past and the possibilities offered by AI today, provided it is approached in a proportionate, prudent, and person-centered way, underpinned by appropriate ethical guidance and active ethical awareness in clinical and legal practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
54
审稿时长
41 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Law and Psychiatry is intended to provide a multi-disciplinary forum for the exchange of ideas and information among professionals concerned with the interface of law and psychiatry. There is a growing awareness of the need for exploring the fundamental goals of both the legal and psychiatric systems and the social implications of their interaction. The journal seeks to enhance understanding and cooperation in the field through the varied approaches represented, not only by law and psychiatry, but also by the social sciences and related disciplines.
期刊最新文献
Recent research involving consent, alcohol intoxication, and memory: Implications for expert testimony in sexual assault cases Comparison of sociodemographic, clinical, and alexithymia characteristics of schizophrenia patients with and without criminal records Assessing mental capacity in the context of abuse and neglect: A relational lens Mediating the court procedural justice–delinquency relationship with certainty perceptions and legitimacy beliefs RECAPACITA project: Comparing neuropsychological profiles in people with severe mental disorders, with and without capacity modification
×
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