Specifically human: Human work and care in the age of machines

Bertolaso, Marta; Rocchi, Marta

doi:10.1111/beer.12281

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In some fields, such as health care, using a robot as a substitute for a human worker raises particularly sensitive questions (Bertolaso et al [12]. While it is considered unproblematic for robots to take over routine caring tasks, which require no emotional, intimate, personal involvement, it is considered more appropriate to reserve more personal and caring jobs for humans (Kool et al [47]: 56).…”

Section: E Meaning and (Just) Division Of Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identifying key ethical debates for autonomous robots in agri-food: a research agenda

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agribusinesses are investing in different forms of AI robots, as there is a lot of hope that these machines will help meet the challenges within the agricultural industry, which is to efficiently produce more food for a growing world population. AI robots are expected to enhance production, while compensating for lack of manpower, reducing production costs, taking over unattractive (risky, heavy, and dirty) jobs and reducing the burden of food production on the environment. In spite of these promises, however, AI robots for agri-food also give rise to ethical questions and concerns, which have been little researched and discussed until now. To fill this gap, we developed a research agenda for future research in this area. To do this, we opened our analysis to focus on ethics AI robots generally to specifically identify which of these issues are most relevant to agro-robots. The question we want to find an answer to is: what are the most relevant ethical questions raised about AI robots for robots developed for the agri-food sector? And which questions are not mentioned in the literature, which are particularly relevant for agro-robots? Our paper will provide an overview over the key issues and areas which deserve further elaboration to come to a more mature ethics of AI agro-robots.

show abstract

Section: E Meaning and (Just) Division Of Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, to preserve the dignity of the persons who are cared for, full automation of caring tasks is considered problematic. Care should involve meaningful human contact, which cannot be substituted by a robot (Kool et al [47]: 77; Bertolaso et al [12].…”

Section: E Meaning and (Just) Division Of Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying key ethical debates for autonomous robots in agri-food: a research agenda

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present degradation of environment and climate, the human ignorance of this degradation (Browne, 2018), technological and economic development possibly corroding norms and values (Durkheim, 1932; Durkheim, [1897] 1960; Velasquez Tuliao, Chen, & Yeh, 2020, pp. 336–337) and harbouring a reductive concept of man (Bertolaso & Rocchi, 2020, p. 2) prove the shortcoming of this belief. The confidence in unfettered man‐made progress traces its main origins to the British early enlightenment philosopher Bacon, [1626] 1952).…”

Section: Justification Fallaciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

CSR politics of non‐recognition: Justification fallacies marginalising criticism, society, and environment

Norberg

2020

Business Ethics: A Eur Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Business is frequently criticized for not taking social and environmental responsibility. Large companies respond with CSR activities and some also with formulating justifications for their actions. This could indicate that business opens up to the criticism. I do, however, not observe such openness in the current study, but how companies use “CSR justifications” to fend off criticism. While companies use justifications as tool for creating legitimacy, I distinguish five justification fallacies. These failures in dealing with criticism cause a marginalisation of criticism, society, and environment. The fallacies found are neglecting criticism, shareholder primacy, organisation‐centricity, conflict avoidance, and progressivism. I contribute to the use of Habermasian ethics in the business ethics literature by showing how CSR justifications could play a part in a rational discourse. The concept justification fallacy, and the five fallacies can provide a framework for analysing corporate rhetoric more generally. Managers have fundamental difficulties in handling ethics and do not reflect on their reasons for working with CSR. They should be more careful when formulating justifications. In our situation of increasing affective polarisation, business needs to be more constructive than merely to marginalise criticism.

show abstract

“…The lack of a universal definition is one of the reasons why the intelligence conception used for AI is usually compared to the human one ( Coeckelberg, 2020 ). In this sense, the anthropomorphic illusion 1 is an explanation for the comparison, represented by the reductionism in the view of human beings, reflected in mechanicism - on the epistemological level - and in utilitarianism - on the ethical level ( Bertolaso and Rocchi, 2022 ). Therefore, if defining intelligence has always been challenging, the modern form of intelligence did not make it easier to follow the idea.…”

Section: Why Do Ai Ethics Matter?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethical content in artificial intelligence systems: A demand explained in three critical points

Bertoncini

Serafim

2023

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Artificial intelligence (AI) advancements are changing people’s lives in ways never imagined before. We argue that ethics used to be put in perspective by seeing technology as an instrument during the first machine age. However, the second machine age is already a reality, and the changes brought by AI are reshaping how people interact and flourish. That said, ethics must also be analyzed as a requirement in the content. To expose this argument, we bring three critical points - autonomy, right of explanation, and value alignment - to guide the debate of why ethics must be part of the systems, not just in the principles to guide the users. In the end, our discussion leads to a reflection on the redefinition of AI’s moral agency. Our distinguishing argument is that ethical questioning must be solved only after giving AI moral agency, even if not at the same human level. For future research, we suggest appreciating new ways of seeing ethics and finding a place for machines, using the inputs of the models we have been using for centuries but adapting to the new reality of the coexistence of artificial intelligence and humans.

show abstract

Specifically human: Human work and care in the age of machines

Cited by 13 publications

References 27 publications

Identifying key ethical debates for autonomous robots in agri-food: a research agenda

Identifying key ethical debates for autonomous robots in agri-food: a research agenda

CSR politics of non‐recognition: Justification fallacies marginalising criticism, society, and environment

Ethical content in artificial intelligence systems: A demand explained in three critical points

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About