Reactive agency and technology

Reactive agency and technology
复制标题

反应性机构和技术

DOI:
10.1007/s43681-023-00366-6
复制
发表时间:
2023
期刊:
AI and Ethics
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
Tollon F
Tollon F
中科院分区:
--
文献类型:
--
作者:
Tollon F

文献摘要

参考文献

相似文献

在一个充斥着几乎无休止的技术干扰和影响的世界里,真正的人类机构还有空间吗?我们常常感觉到,我们的技术景观正在把我们拉向许多方向,我们的代理机构更多的是我们对世界的反应,而不是我们施加我们的意志。在本文中,我,探讨这将意味着什么,认真对待这些背景因素,并把它们烤成一个帐户的机构。也就是说,如果机构一直处于反应状态怎么办?这是Rüdiger Bittner提出的一个建议,他认为行动的原因是对世界事态的反应。这与对能动性的“标准”观点相反,后者用信念和欲望等东西来解释行动。最后,我发现这种对能动性的反应性描述是不可信的。然而,我认为它揭示了一个潜在的解决方案,以“新”的问题,所有无处不在的技术:一个反应帐户不认为这些技术必然是一种威胁,而是把我们的注意力集中在他们改变和塑造我们的可用环境和我们的可能性采取行动的方式。虽然我认为反应性的解释走得太远了,但我从中得到的是,我们的环境为我们提供了各种行动的可能性(以可供性的形式),我们应该在思考代理和技术的影响时认真对待这一点。此外,从我们对环境中各种“诱惑”的“堕落”倾向中可以学到一些东西,这不仅证明了对不同技术设计的进一步反思,而且证明了这些技术是否应该存在。
Is there room for genuine human agency in a world populated by almost incessant technological distraction and influence? It often feels as though our technological landscape is pulling us in a number of directions, and that our agency is more a function of usreactingto the world as opposed to us exerting our will. In this paper I, explore what it would mean to take these contextual factors seriously and bake them into an account of agency. That is, what if agency is reactiveall the way down? This is a proposal made by Rüdiger Bittner, who argues that the reason(s) for action are responses to states of affairs in the world. This is in contrast to ‘standard’ views of agency, which explain actions with things like beliefs and desires. Ultimately, I find such a reactive account of agency implausible. However, I think it reveals a potential solution to the ‘new’ problem of all-pervasive technologies: a reactive account does not see these technologiesnecessarilyas a threat, but rather focusses our attention on thewaysin which they change and shape our available context and our possibility to act. While I argue the reactive account goes too far, what I take from it is that our environment offers us various possibilities for action (in the form of affordances), and that we ought to take this seriously in our thinking both about agency and about the impacts of technology. Moreover, there is something to learn from our tendency to ‘fall’ for various ‘temptations’ in our environment, and this justifies further reflection on not only the design of different technologies, but whether such technologies ought to exist at all.
DOI: 10.1007/s13347-022-00530-6
发表时间: 2022
影响因子: --
作者:
Steinert, Steffen;Dennis, Matthew James
通讯作者: Dennis, Matthew James
行动、理由和理由
DOI: 10.1515/9783110346305
发表时间: 2015
影响因子: 19.6
作者:
Marco Iorio;Ralf Stoecker
通讯作者: Ralf Stoecker
内部道德:谷歌眼镜、科林里奇困境和隐私的中介价值
DOI: 10.1177/0162243918793711
发表时间: 2018
期刊: Science, Technology, & Human Values
影响因子: --
作者:
O. Kudina;P. Verbeek
通讯作者: P. Verbeek
做什么事情
DOI: 10.5325/j.ctv14gp4w7
发表时间: 2005
影响因子: 9.2
作者:
P. Verbeek
通讯作者: P. Verbeek
DOI: 10.1007/s13347-020-00401-y
发表时间: 2021
影响因子: --
作者:
Klenk M
通讯作者: Klenk M