scholarly journals The Ethics of Automated Vehicles: Why Self-driving Cars Should not Swerve in Dilemma Cases

Res Publica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Lawlor
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Trolley Problem ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Safe Spaces ◽  
The Social ◽  
Legal Responsibilities ◽  
Self Driving Cars ◽  
Trolley Cases ◽  
Do So

AbstractIn this paper, I will argue that automated vehicles should not swerve to avoid a person or vehicle in its path, unless they can do so without imposing risks onto others. I will argue that this is the conclusion that we should reach even if we start by assuming that we should divert the trolley in the standard trolley case (in which the trolley will hit and kill five people on the track, unless it is diverted onto a different track, where it will hit and kill just one person). In defence of this claim, I appeal to the distribution of moral and legal responsibilities, highlighting the importance of safe spaces, and arguing in favour of constraints on what can be done to minimise casualties. My arguments draw on the methodology associated with the trolley problem. As such, this paper also defends this methodology, highlighting a number of ways in which authors misunderstand and misrepresent the trolley problem. For example, the ‘trolley problem’ is not the ‘name given by philosophers to classic examples of unavoidable crash scenarios, historically involving runaway trolleys’, as Millar suggests, and trolley cases should not be compared with ‘model building in the (social) sciences’, as Gogoll and Müller suggest. Trolley cases have more in common with lab experiments than model building, and the problem referred to in the trolley problem is not the problem of deciding what to do in any one case. Rather, it refers to the problem of explaining what appear to be conflicting intuitions when we consider two cases together. The problem, for example, could be: how do we justify the claim that automated vehicles should not swerve even if we accept the claim that we should divert the trolley in an apparently similar trolley case?

Social Ontology and Model-Building: A Response to Epstein

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-192
Author(s):  
Nadia Ruiz
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Social Ontology ◽  
Model Construction ◽  
Ontological Commitments ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Social

Brian Epstein has recently argued that a thoroughly microfoundationalist approach towards economics is unconvincing for metaphysical reasons. Generally, Epstein argues that for an improvement in the methodology of social science we must adopt social ontology as the foundation of social sciences; that is, the standing microfoundationalist debate could be solved by fixing economics’ ontology. However, as I show in this paper, fixing the social ontology prior to the process of model construction is optional instead of necessary and that metaphysical-ontological commitments are often the outcome of model construction, not its starting point. By focusing on the practice of modeling in economics the paper provides a useful inroad into the debate about the role of metaphysics in the natural and social sciences more generally.

Reflections on Human Rights: An Eastern European Perspective

1989 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
Tamäs Földesi
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
State Theory ◽  
Main Task ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
European Perspective ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Social ◽  
Theoretical Issues ◽  
Do So

To create a state-theory that can answer the social problems of today, to break away from the theses that merely interpret the classics – as the sciences dealing with the economy managed to do during the past 15–20 years – is the main task of social sciences dealing with the theoretical issues of the state these days. If they fail to do so, their work will be forced to the periphery of the social movements, will not be able to assist the processes of society. It is my conviction that this is a vast responsibility of the social sciences in our age.

Stochastic Actor-Oriented Models for the Co-Evolution of Networks and Behavior: An Introduction and Tutorial

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuval Kalish
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Model Building ◽  
Network Evolution ◽  
Network Ties ◽  
Network Change ◽  
Step Model ◽  
The Social ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Organizational Scholarship ◽  
And Behavior

Stochastic actor-oriented (SAO) models are a family of models for network dynamics that enable researchers to test multiple, often competing explanations for network change and estimate the extent and relative power of various influences on network evolution. SAO models for the co-evolution of network ties and actor behavior, the most comprehensive category of SAO models, examine how networks and actor attributes—their behavior, performance, or attitudes—influence each other over time. While these models have been widely used in the social sciences, and particularly in educational settings, their use in organizational scholarship has been extremely limited. This paper provides a layperson introduction to SAO models for the co-evolution of networks and behavior and the types of research questions they can address. The models and their underpinnings are explained in nonmathematical terms, and theoretical explanations are supported by a concrete, detailed example that includes step-by-step model building and hypothesis testing, alongside an R script.

Model Building in the Social Sciences.

1970 ◽  
Vol 133 (3) ◽  
pp. 488
Author(s):  
G. R. Fisher ◽  
Roger Peltier
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Model Building ◽  
The Social

scholarly journals COVID-19 Diagnoses: A Source of Immanent Value and Novelty

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Marsha Rosengarten
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Complex Dynamics ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
The Body ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Active Participant ◽  
Sensory Awareness ◽  
The Social ◽  
Do So

Although the body is fundamental to observation and feeling, its experience of infection is regarded by the biomedical sciences and, for the most part, the social sciences as relatively obtuse. The body is situated as a mere object of inquiry, as if its intricate and highly complex dynamics indicate that it is no more than an imperfect animated machine and, concomitantly, infection simply a change to its normative mechanisms. In this Position Piece, I ask: what might be afforded to the problematic diagnosis of communicable infection and to global health strategies of containment if the body were appreciated as an active participant in diagnoses? To do so, I take up the ‘pluralist panpsychist’ proposition that bodies think. Counter to the view that thinking is the preserve of the human mind and that value is an ‘after’ ascribed to a given fact or situation, I experiment with the idea that the body’s sensory awareness can be thought as a creative source of immanent values. Drawing on a series of empirical examples primarily focused on the perceived novelty of COVID-19, I offer a preliminary sketch of how revaluing the body as involved in decision-making and novelty might enrich the scope of biomedical and social diagnoses.

Norms: An Integrated Framework

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 467-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Horne ◽  
Stefanie Mollborn
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Order ◽  
Social Conflict ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Integrated Framework ◽  
The Past ◽  
Theoretical Approaches ◽  
The Social ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Do So

Norms are a foundational concept in sociology. Following a period of skepticism about norms as overly deterministic and as paying too little attention to social conflict, inequalities, and agency, the past 20 years have seen a proliferation of norms research across the social sciences. Here we focus on the burgeoning research in sociology to answer questions about where norms come from, why people enforce them, and how they are applied. To do so, we rely on three key theoretical approaches in the literature—consequentialist, relational, and agentic. As we apply these approaches, we explore their implications for what are arguably the two most fundamental issues in sociology—social order and inequality. We conclude by synthesizing and building on existing norms research to produce an integrated theoretical framework that can shed light on aspects of norms that are currently not well understood—in particular, their change and erosion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document