This paper explores and rehabilitates the value of decisional privacy as a conceptual tool, complementary to informational privacy, for critiquing personalized choice architectures employed by self-tracking technologies. Self-tracking technologies are promoted and used as a means to self-improvement. Based on large aggregates of personal data and the data of other users, self-tracking technologies offer personalized feedback that nudges the user into behavioral change. The real-time personalization of choice architectures requires continuous surveillance and is a very powerful technology, recently coined as (...) “hypernudging.” While users celebrate the increased personalization of their coaching devices, “hypernudging” technologies raise concerns about manipulation. This paper addresses that intuition by claiming that decisional privacy is at stake. It thus counters the trend to solely focus on informational privacy when evaluating information and communication technologies. It proposes that decisional privacy and informational privacy are often part of a mutually reinforcing dynamic. Hypernudging is used as a key example to illustrate that the two dimensions should not be treated separately. Hypernudging self-tracking technologies compromise autonomy because they violate informational and decisional privacy. In order to effectively judge whether technologies that use hypernudges empower users, we need both privacy dimensions as conceptual tools. (shrink)

This paper critically engages with new self-tracking technologies. In particular, it focuses on a conceptual tension between the idea that disclosing personal information increases one’s autonomy and the idea that informational privacy is a condition for autonomous personhood. I argue that while self-tracking may sometimes prove to be an adequate method to shed light on particular aspects of oneself and can be used to strengthen one’s autonomy, self-tracking technologies often cancel out these benefits by exposing too much about oneself to (...) an unspecified audience, thus undermining the informational privacy boundaries necessary for living an autonomous life. (shrink)

El objeto de este análisis es examinar —naturalmente, de un modo introductorio— cuál puede ser la repercusión de los eventuales avances en los objetivos transhumanistas en el terreno de la responsabilidad criminal. A mi juicio, el análisis de las posibles consecuencias del transhumanismo en el dominio del Derecho penal afecta a dos ámbitos distintos: (i) en primer lugar, puede incidir en los factores que, hoy en día, vertebran la imputación de responsabilidad penal; (ii) por otro lado, es preciso abordar la (...) repercusión que el transhumanismo podría tener ya no en el juicio de imputación de responsabilidad penal, sino en la determinación de las consecuencias asignadas a los responsables penales y en su proceso de ejecución. Como más adelante se verá, esta reflexión arroja hoy en día más preguntas que respuestas. (shrink)

AESTHETIC RELATIVITY Among the philosophical disciplines logic has the reputation of rigid and complete finality. It has been pronounced by no lesser..

In this paper we address three concepts that are much talked about in the animal robotics community. These concepts are (1) representations, (2) goals, and (3) minimal cognition. We want to distinguish between information as an objective commodity and representation as something which involves a user, i.e. a system which accesses and uses information. Information per se lies out there and exists independently of any system that makes use of it. Representations presuppose design and require a user. We want to (...) distinguish different kinds of purposive behaviour, which involve different notions of goals, which themselves appear to be different from the point of view of the agent, the designer and the naive observer. We want to try to define cognition in terms of the minimal criteria that would be acceptable in view of our definitions of representations and goals. We recognise that full‐blown cognition may require ingredients other than those of minimal cognition. (shrink)

Thema dieser philosophischen Untersuchung ist das phanomenale oder sinnliche Bewusstsein. Darunter fallen die mit Horen, Sehen, Schmecken, Riechen, Tasten und Fuhlen gegebenen Erfahrungen oder Erlebnisse. Ausgehend von einer Prufung des in der zeitgenossischen analytischen Philosophie gefuhrten einschlagigen Diskurses wie auch unter Bezug auf die im 17. Jahrhundert u.a. von Descartes und Locke entwickelte Lehre von den sekundaren Qualitaten unternimmt das Buch eine Verteidigung zweier Hauptthesen: Konstitutiv fur sinnliches Bewusstsein (im Unterschied zu dem mit Denken, Meinen oder blossem Vorstellen verbundenen Bewusstsein) (...) ist die unmittelbare Prasenz sinnlicher Qualitaten. Diese Qualitaten treten nicht vor oder jenseits der Sinnesorgane auf, sondern sind bloss im Bewusstsein exemplifiziert. Die mit jeder einzelnen Sinnesmodalitat gegebenen sinnlichen Qualitaten bilden jeweils spezifische Strukturen (Beziehungen der Ahnlichkeit, des Ausschlusses, der Anordnung/Abfolge), die fur sie wesentlich sind. Fur eine jede dieser Sinnesmodalitaten wird gezeigt, dass die physikalischen Reize, die fur die entsprechenden Sinneseindrucke kausal verantwortlich sind, untereinander nicht die Strukturen aufweisen, die wir an den sinnlichen Qualitaten selbst finden und die wesentlich fur diese Qualitaten sind. Sie lassen sich, so die zweite Hauptthese des Buches, demzufolge nicht mit den physikalischen Merkmalen von Gegenstanden und Medien vor den Sinnesorganen identifizieren. Dies hat einschneidende Konsequenzen fur Theorien des menschlichen Bewusstseins. Im Gegensatz zu den meisten philosophischen Arbeiten zum Thema unternimmt es diese Untersuchung, alle Sinnesmodalitaten grundlich zu diskutieren und dabei den einschlagigen fachwissenschaftlichen Stand der Diskussion fur die philosophische Argumentation nutzbar zu machen. Dies macht die Arbeit sowohl fur Philosophen wie fur Fachwissenschaftler interessant, die mit dem Thema Bewusstsein befasst sind. (shrink)

The role of artificial intelligence (AI) in organizations has fundamentally changed from performing routine tasks to supervising human employees. While prior studies focused on normative perceptions of such AI supervisors, employees’ behavioral reactions towards them remained largely unexplored. We draw from theories on AI aversion and appreciation to tackle the ambiguity within this field and investigate if and why employees might adhere to unethical instructions either from a human or an AI supervisor. In addition, we identify employee characteristics affecting this (...) relationship. To inform this debate, we conducted four experiments (total N = 1701) and used two state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms (causal forest and transformers). We consistently find that employees adhere less to unethical instructions from an AI than a human supervisor. Further, individual characteristics such as the tendency to comply without dissent or age constitute important boundary conditions. In addition, Study 1 identified that the perceived mind of the supervisors serves as an explanatory mechanism. We generate further insights on this mediator via experimental manipulations in two pre-registered studies by manipulating mind between two AI (Study 2) and two human supervisors (Study 3). In (pre-registered) Study 4, we replicate the resistance to unethical instructions from AI supervisors in an incentivized experimental setting. Our research generates insights into the ‘black box’ of human behavior toward AI supervisors, particularly in the moral domain, and showcases how organizational researchers can use machine learning methods as powerful tools to complement experimental research for the generation of more fine-grained insights. (shrink)

The empirist tradition has it that the genuine explanation of the occurrence of an event requires citing its cause and citing its real cause requires specifying a law that subsumes the explanandum-event and the explanans-event Davidson denies that the mentalistically described antecedents of intentional actions can be subsumed under strict laws, but nonetheless affirms, that beliefs and desires arc causes of actions. Some critics pointed out that this position is not a consistentone and levelled the charge of epiphenomenalism against it. (...) It is shown that there are reasons for thinking that Davidson's position is sound. (shrink)

Algorithmic Justice Algorithmic bias can lead to harmful forms of algorithmic discrimination. In this article, I argue that technology does not exist in a vacuum and is always part of power relations. I therefore criticize technological fixes that reduce social problems to a technical solution. Dominant solutions like ‘debiasing’, while important, avoid questions about deep-rooted injustices. They ‘accept’ and work with and within the frames of existing social (power) structures. Justice requires considering the structural dimensions of inequality. I draw attention (...) to Langdon Winner’s call to ask whether a technology is ‘just’ rather than approaching the issue of algorithmic discrimination from a solutionist angle of optimization and functionality. I propose that we draw inspiration from the work of philosophers who approach justice from a structural or systemic perspective. This results in a philosophical approach that stretches the concept of ‘discrimination’ and exposes the relationships between inequalities. Moreover, it questions the structures and boundaries in which the technology is embedded. Finally, I criticize the current hype around AI that distracts us from the fact that we have had existential problems with AI for a long time and that these problems are deeply intertwined with (the history of) our social power relations. (shrink)

The empirist tradition has it that the genuine explanation of the occurrence of an event requires citing its cause and citing its real cause requires specifying a law that subsumes the explanandum-event and the explanans-event Davidson denies that the mentalistically described antecedents of intentional actions can be subsumed under strict laws, but nonetheless affirms, that beliefs and desires arc causes of actions. Some critics pointed out that this position is not a consistentone and levelled the charge of epiphenomenalism against it. (...) It is shown that there are reasons for thinking that Davidson's position is sound. (shrink)

En el presente trabajo se pretende esbozar una propuesta pedagógica a partir de lo que Michel Foucault concibe como cuidado de sí y Hans-Georg Gadamer designa como bildung o formación. El cuidado de sí, que puede traducirse como formación de sí, como conocimiento de sí, como práctica de sí, resulta ..

This research statement presents a roadmap for the ethical evaluation of contact tracing apps. Assuming the possible development of an effective and secure contact tracing app, this roadmap explores three ethical concerns—privacy, data monopolists and coercion- based on three scenarios. The first scenario envisions and critically evaluates an app that is built on the conceptualization of privacy as anonymity and a mere individual right rather than a social value. The second scenario sketches and critically discusses an app that adequately addresses (...) privacy concerns but is facilitated by data monopolists such as Google and Apple. The final scenario discusses the coerced installation and use of a privacy-friendly, independently developed contact tracing app. The main worry is coercion through societal exclusion and limited societal participation. The statement concludes with three suggestions for designing an ethical contact tracing app and a research agenda. (shrink)