scholarly journals Erosión ética en el trato con la inteligencia artificial

2020 ◽  
pp. 43-58
Author(s):  
Desireé Torres Lozano
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Mirror Neurons ◽  
Machine Intelligence ◽  
Publishing Company ◽  
Frankfurt Am Main ◽  
Modern Approach ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Computing Machinery ◽  
West Bohemia

ResumenEl presente artículo tiene como finalidad definir la IA y poner en discusión su injerencia social, así como las consecuencias éticas que esto conlleva, ya que la construcción del hombre contemporáneo debe tener en cuenta el trato con estos sistemas. Definiremos qué es la inteligencia, cómo es que se le ha llamado inteligencia a los procesos de las máquinas y podremos establecer un diálogo entre la influencia ética que conlleva el trato con las mismas. Palabras clave Inteligencia artificial; Ética; Sistemas; Tecnología; Hombre Referencias Aristóteles, De Anima, Madrid: Gredos, 2000. ___, Ética a Nicómaco, Madrid: Gredos, 2000. ___, Política, Madrid, Gredos, 2003. Aspe, V. Nuevos sentidos mimesis en la Poética de Aristóteles, en Tópicos, Revista de filosofía, México: Tópicos, 2005. Bellman, Richard, An Introduction To Artificial Intelligence, San Francisco: Boyd and Fraser Publishing Company, 1978. Büchner et al, Discovering Internet Marketing Intelligence through Web Log Mining, Antrin, Mine it, Newtownabbey: University of Ulster Shore Road, 1998. Corominas, Pascual, Diccionario Crítico Etimológico Castellano e Hispánico, Madrid, Gredos, 2002. Descartes, Meditaciones Metafísicas, Gredos, Madrid, 2000. Elaine Rich, Kevin Knight, Artificial Intelligence, New Delhi: McGraw-Hill, 1991. Bude, Gesellschaft der Angst, Hamburgo: Hamburger Edition HIS, 2014. Heidegger, Platon: Sophistes, Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1992. ___, Über den Humanismus, Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1949. ___, Was heisst denken?, Frankfurt Am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 2002. Hickock, Gregory, The Myth of Mirror Neurons. The Real Neuroscience of communication and cognition, Nueva York: W. W. Norton & ­Company, 2014. J. Haugeland, Artificial Intelligence: The very idea, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1985. Kirk, G.S. y Raven, J. E., Los filósofos presocráticos, Madrid: Gredos, 1970. Kurzweil Raymond, The Age of Intelligent Machines, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1990. Mariarosaria Taddeo, Luciano Floridi, How AI can be a force for good, en Science, Vol. 361, Issue 6404, Oxford: Oxford University, 2018. Nils Johan Nilsson, Artificial Intelligence: A new synthesis, USA: Morgan Kaufmann, 1998. Platón, Cratilo, Madrid, Gredos, 2004. Poole David et al, Computational Intelligence, a Logical Approach, Oxford: Oxford University, 1998. Press, Gill, A Very Short History Of Artificial Intelligence (AI), USA: Forbes, 2016. Russell, Norvig, Artificial Intelligence, A Modern Approach, New Jersey, Pearson, 2010. Armstrong, S., & K. Sotala, ​How we​’re predicting AI​ or failing to,​ Beyond Artificial Intelligence, Machine Intelligence Research Institute, Pilsen: University of West Bohemia,2015. Turing Alan, MIND, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Cambridge: A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy, 1950. Winston Patrick Henry, Artificial intelligence, USA: Addison Wesley, Publishing Company, 1992.

Іллокуція англомовного дискурсу виправдання (на прикладі творів сучасної художньої англійської та американської прози)

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 69-81
Author(s):  
Тетяна Мірончук ◽  
Наталія Одарчук
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Speech Acts ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
New Delhi ◽  
Frankfurt Am Main ◽  
Penguin Book ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Oxford University Press

У статті досліджується актоіллокутивний потенціал англійського побутового дискурсу виправдання шляхом зіставлення іллокутивних характеристик частотних у дискурсі виправдання мовленнєвих актів. Спираючись на змодельовані конструкти змісту виправдання, дифенсивну інтенцію мовця визначено передумовою породження дискурсу виправдання.  У результаті вивчення наявних у науковій літературі класифікацій мовленнєвих актів визначено, що домінантна іллокутивна сила дискурсу виправдання включає складові інформування та переконування, що типово представлено констативом та асертивом. Власне мовленнєвий акт виправдання визначено як кредитив з включеною перлокуцією винесення виправдального вердикту, яким регулюється міжсуб’єктна взаємодія. Література References Вендлер З. Причинные отношения // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. – Вып. 18:Логический анализ естественного языка. – М.: Прогресс, 1986. – С. 264–277.Vendler, Z. (1986). Prichinnije otnoshenija [Causal Relations]. In: New in World Linguistics,(pp. 264-277), Issue 18: Study in Logic of Natural Language. Moscow: Progress. Вендлер З. Факты в языке // Философия, логика, язык. – М.: Прогресс, 1987. – С. 293–318.Vendler, Z. (1987). Fakti v jazike [Facts in Language], (pp. 293-318). In: Phylosophy, Logic,Language. Moscow: Progress. Йоргенсен, Марианне В., Филлипс Луиза Дж. (2008). Дискурс-анализ. Теория и метод.Xарьков: Гуманитарный Центр [Humanitarian Centre].Jorgensen, M & Phillips, Louise. (2002). [Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method]. –London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi. Карабан В. И. Сложные речевые единицы: прагматика английских асиндетическихполипредикативных образований: [монография] / Карабан В. И. – К.: Вища школа, 1989.Karaban, V. I. (1989). Slozhnije rechevije jedinitsi: pragmatika anglijskikh asindeticheskikhpolipredikativnikh obrazovanii [Complex Speech Acts: Pragmatics of English AsyndeticPolypredicative Formations]. Kyiv: Vyshcha Shkola. Остин Дж. Слово как действие // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. – Вып. 17: ТРА. – М. :Прогресс, 1986. – С. 22–129.Austin, J. (1986). Slovo kak deistvije [Word as Action] In: New in World Linguistics, (pp. 22–129), Issue 17: Speech Acts Theory. M.: Progress. Хилпинен Р. Семантика императивов и деонтическая логика // Новое в зарубежнойлингвистике. – Вып. 18: Логический анализ естественного языка. – М. : Прогресс, 1986. –С. 300–318.Hilpinen, R. (1986). Semantica imperativov i deonticheskaja logica [Semantics of Imperativesand Deontic Logic]. In: New in World Linguistics, (pp. 300–318), Issue 18: Study in Logic ofNatural Language. Moscow: Progress. Шевченко І. С. Дискурс як мисленнєво-комунікативна діяльність / І. С. Шевченко,О. І. Морозова // Дискурс як когнітивно-комунікативний феномен: [кол. монографія] / [зазаг. ред. І. С. Шевченко]. – Х. : Константа, 2005. – С. 21–28.Shevchenko, I. (2005). Dyskurs jak myslenevo-komunikatyvna diyalnist [Discourse as Mentaland Communicative Activity]. In: Discourse as Cognitive and Communicative Phenomenon,(pp. 21–28). I. Shevchenko, (ed.). Kharkiv: Konstanta. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Auwera, J. van der. (1980). On the Meaning of Basic Speech Acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 4(3), 253–303. Auwera, J. van der & Alsenoy, L. van. (2016). On the Typology of Negative Concord. Studiesin Language, 40, 473–512. Bach, K. & Harnish, R. M. (1979). Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts. Cambridge,Mass.: MIT Press. Ballmer, Th. T. & Brennenstuhl, W. (1981). A Study in the Lexical Analysis of EnglishSpeech Activity Verbs. New York, Berlin: Ruhr-Universität. Dijk, T. A. van. (1997). The Study of Discourse. In: Discourse as Structure and Process,(pp. 1–35). London: Sage Publications. Grice, H. P. (1991). Logic & Conversation. Pragmatics, 305–316. Gruber, H. (1998). Disagreeing: Sequential Placement and Internal Structure of Disagreementsin Conflict Episodes. Text, 4 (18), 467–503. Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. In: Handlungsrationalität undgesellschaftliche Rationalisierung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp. Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. New York, London: Longman. Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. London, New York, Melbourne etc: CUP. Rees-Miller, J. (2000). Power, severity & context in disagreement. The Journal of Pragmatics,8 (32), 1087–1111. Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schifrin, D. (2001). Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell. Schlieben Lange, Br. (1975). Linguistische Pragmatik. Stuttgart, Berlin: Kohlhammer. Stalnaker, R. (1978). Assertion. In: Syntax & Semantics, (pp. 315–333), Vol. 9: Pragmatics.New York, San Francisco, London. Tatsuki, D. H. (2000). If my complaints could passion move: an interlanguage study ofaggression. The Journal of Pragmatics, 7 (32), 1003–1007. Tannen, D. (1995). You Just Don’t Understand. N.Y.: University of California. Tsui, A. B. M. (1995). English Conversation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wunderlich, D. (1980). Methodological Remarks on Speech Act Theory. In: Speech ActTheory & Pragmatics, (pp. 291–312), Vol. 10. Dordrecht : D. Reidel Publ. Comp. Джерела іллюстративного матеріалу Sources Amis, M. (1991). Time’s Arrow. London: Penguin Book. Christie, A. (1945). Death Comes at the End. London: Fontana. Francis, D. (1992). Longshot. New York: Fawcett Crest. Gardner, J. (1987). The Sunlight Dialogues. New York: Vintage Books. James, P.D. (1977). Death of an Expert Witness. London: Penguin Books. O’Hara, J. (1985). Ten North Frederik. New York: Carol and Graph Publ. Pronzini, B. (1990). I didn’t Do It. In: New Crimes, 2, (136–140). London: Robinson Publ.8. Rendel, R. (1985). All Unkindness of Ravens. London: Hutchinson.

The Role of Theories of Embodied Cognition in Research and Modeling of Emotions

2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 124-138
Author(s):  
Alexandra V. Shiller
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Embodied Cognition ◽  
Mirror Neurons ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Unknown Quantity ◽  
Emotional Processes ◽  
Strong Artificial Intelligence ◽  
European Philosophy ◽  
Postmodern Philosophy

The article analyzes the role of theories of embodied cognition for the development of emotion research. The role and position of emotions changed as philosophy developed. In classical and modern European philosophy, the idea of the “primacy of reason” prevailed over emotions and physicality, emotions and affective life were described as low-ranking phenomena regarding cognitive processes or were completely eliminated as an unknown quantity. In postmodern philosophy, attention focuses on physicality and sensuality, which are rated higher than rational principle, mind and intelligence. Within the framework of this approach, there is a recently emerged theory of embodied cognition, which allows to take a fresh look at the place of emotions in the architecture of mental processes – thinking, perception, memory, imagination, speech. The article describes and analyzes a number of empirical studies showing the impossibility of excluding emotional processes and the significance of their research for understanding the architecture of embodied cognition. However, the features of the architecture of embodied cognition remain unclear, and some of the discoveries of recent years (mirror neurons or neurons of simulation) rather raise new questions and require further research. The rigorously described and clear architecture of the embodied cognition can grow the theoretical basis that will allow to advance the studies of learning processes, language understanding, psychotherapy techniques, social attitudes and stereotypes, highlight the riddle of consciousness and create new theories of consciousness or even create an anthropomorphic artificial intelligence that is close to “strong artificial intelligence.”

The Future of Human Workers

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahesh K. Joshi ◽  
J.R. Klein
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Machine Intelligence ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Traditional Model ◽  
Global Workforce ◽  
Repetitive Tasks ◽  
The Internet Of Things

New technologies like artificial intelligence, robotics, machine intelligence, and the Internet of Things are seeing repetitive tasks move away from humans to machines. Humans cannot become machines, but machines can become more human-like. The traditional model of educating workers for the workforce is fast becoming irrelevant. There is a massive need for the retooling of human workers. Humans need to be trained to remain focused in a society which is constantly getting bombarded with information. The two basic elements of physical and mental capacity are slowly being taken over by machines and artificial intelligence. This changes the fundamental role of the global workforce.

The Future of Work and the Changing Workplace

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahesh K. Joshi ◽  
J.R. Klein
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Machine Intelligence ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
Digital Innovation ◽  
Future Of Work ◽  
The Past ◽  
The World ◽  
Public Debates ◽  
The Future ◽  
Market Opportunities

The world of work has been impacted by technology. Work is different than it was in the past due to digital innovation. Labor market opportunities are becoming polarized between high-end and low-end skilled jobs. Migration and its effects on employment have become a sensitive political issue. From Buffalo to Beijing public debates are raging about the future of work. Developments like artificial intelligence and machine intelligence are contributing to productivity, efficiency, safety, and convenience but are also having an impact on jobs, skills, wages, and the nature of work. The “undiscovered country” of the workplace today is the combination of the changing landscape of work itself and the availability of ill-fitting tools, platforms, and knowledge to train for the requirements, skills, and structure of this new age.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document