各种偏见

IF 2.1 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Philosophy Compass Pub Date : 2024-07-22 DOI:10.1111/phc3.13011
Gabbrielle M. Johnson
{"title":"各种偏见","authors":"Gabbrielle M. Johnson","doi":"10.1111/phc3.13011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of <jats:italic>bias</jats:italic> is pervasive in both popular discourse and empirical theorizing within philosophy, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. This widespread application threatens to render the concept too heterogeneous and unwieldy for systematic investigation. This article explores recent philosophical literature attempting to identify a single theoretical category—termed ‘bias’—that could be unified across different contexts. To achieve this aim, the article provides a comprehensive review of theories of bias that are significant in the fields of philosophy of mind, cognitive science, machine learning, and epistemology. It focuses on key examples such as perceptual bias, implicit bias, explicit bias, and algorithmic bias, scrutinizing their similarities and differences. Although these explorations may not conclusively establish the existence of a natural theoretical kind, pursuing the possibility offers valuable insights into how bias is conceptualized and deployed across diverse domains, thus deepening our understanding of its complexities across a wide range of cognitive and computational processes.","PeriodicalId":40011,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy Compass","volume":"94 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Varieties of Bias\",\"authors\":\"Gabbrielle M. Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/phc3.13011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of <jats:italic>bias</jats:italic> is pervasive in both popular discourse and empirical theorizing within philosophy, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. This widespread application threatens to render the concept too heterogeneous and unwieldy for systematic investigation. This article explores recent philosophical literature attempting to identify a single theoretical category—termed ‘bias’—that could be unified across different contexts. To achieve this aim, the article provides a comprehensive review of theories of bias that are significant in the fields of philosophy of mind, cognitive science, machine learning, and epistemology. It focuses on key examples such as perceptual bias, implicit bias, explicit bias, and algorithmic bias, scrutinizing their similarities and differences. Although these explorations may not conclusively establish the existence of a natural theoretical kind, pursuing the possibility offers valuable insights into how bias is conceptualized and deployed across diverse domains, thus deepening our understanding of its complexities across a wide range of cognitive and computational processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40011,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy Compass\",\"volume\":\"94 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy Compass\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.13011\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy Compass","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.13011","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

偏见的概念在哲学、认知科学和人工智能领域的流行话语和经验理论中无处不在。这一概念的广泛应用有可能使其变得过于杂乱无章,难以进行系统的研究。本文探讨了近期的哲学文献,试图找出一个单一的理论范畴--被称为 "偏见"--可以在不同的语境中统一起来。为了实现这一目标,文章全面回顾了在心灵哲学、认知科学、机器学习和认识论领域具有重要意义的偏见理论。文章重点讨论了感知偏差、内隐偏差、显性偏差和算法偏差等关键实例,仔细研究了它们之间的异同。尽管这些探索可能无法最终确立自然理论种类的存在,但对这种可能性的追寻为我们提供了宝贵的见解,让我们了解偏见是如何在不同领域被概念化和应用的,从而加深我们对偏见在广泛的认知和计算过程中的复杂性的理解。
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
Varieties of Bias
The concept of bias is pervasive in both popular discourse and empirical theorizing within philosophy, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. This widespread application threatens to render the concept too heterogeneous and unwieldy for systematic investigation. This article explores recent philosophical literature attempting to identify a single theoretical category—termed ‘bias’—that could be unified across different contexts. To achieve this aim, the article provides a comprehensive review of theories of bias that are significant in the fields of philosophy of mind, cognitive science, machine learning, and epistemology. It focuses on key examples such as perceptual bias, implicit bias, explicit bias, and algorithmic bias, scrutinizing their similarities and differences. Although these explorations may not conclusively establish the existence of a natural theoretical kind, pursuing the possibility offers valuable insights into how bias is conceptualized and deployed across diverse domains, thus deepening our understanding of its complexities across a wide range of cognitive and computational processes.
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
Philosophy Compass
Philosophy Compass Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
87
期刊最新文献
Manipulation Cases in Free Will and Moral Responsibility, Part 1: Cases and Arguments. Manipulation cases in free will and moral responsibility, part 2: Manipulator-focused responses. Gratitude: Its Nature and Normativity Anti‐Exceptionalism about Logic (Part I): From Naturalism to Anti‐Exceptionalism Conventionalist Accounts of Personal Identity Over Time
×
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