Beyond distributions and primary goods: Assessing applications of rawls in information science and technology literature since 1990

Hoffmann, Anna Lauren

doi:10.1002/asi.23747

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 161 publications

(220 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The proposed paper presents an argument in favor of a Rawlsian approach to ethics for Internet technology companies (den Hoven & Rooksby, 2008;Hoffman, 2017). Ethics statements from such companies are analyzed and shown to be utilitarian and teleological in nature, and therefore in opposition to Rawls' theories of justice and fairness.…”

Section: Extended Abstractmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal and Ethical Perspectives on (Big) Data, Platforms, Ai and Algorithms

Ess

franzke

Kwok

et al. 2020

SPIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AoIR and the Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society (JICES) share common interests in critical reflection on the ethical and social dimensions of the internet and internet-facilitated communication, and have begun a collaboration aimed at collecting ethically-focused AoIR conference submissions for presentation and critique at AoIR, with a view towards subsequent publication in a special issue of JICES. This panel collects four papers exploring especially the legal and ethical dimensions of new technologies, including data collection and storage as public goods vis-à-vis central questions of justice (Paper 1, Towards a Political Theory of Data Justice: A Public Good Perspective); critiques from Western and non-Western positions of the utilitarianism otherwise driving the platforms’ business models and rationales (Paper 2, Google and Facebook VS Rawls and Lao-Tsu: How Silicon Valley’s utilitarianism and Confucianism are bad for Internet ethics); basic tensions between the rule of law vis-à-vis algorithmic “decision-making” processes in jurisprudence and “surveillance capitalism” (Paper 3, The Jurisprudence of Datafied Law); and a taxonomy of the ethics of AI, algorithms and big data based on an analysis of 90 guidelines from 2017-2020 (Paper 4, A systematic literature Review of ethical Code of Conducts in the field of Internet Research). These papers directly take up the central interests shared between AoIR and JICES in the ethical and social dimensions of the internet and internet-facilitated communication. They offer new insight on legal and ethical aspects of contemporary technologies, some of which will have specific implications for internet research ethics.

show abstract

Section: Extended Abstractmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal and Ethical Perspectives on (Big) Data, Platforms, Ai and Algorithms

Ess

franzke

Kwok

et al. 2020

SPIR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The technology ethics debate is no longer just concerned with applied ethics but also meta-ethical topics and, crucially, normative ethics and the question of which ethical schools of thought can beneficially inform the applied decision-making in the technology sector. As alternatives to the consequentialist/utilitarian ethics that often shape guidelines and codes of conduct in the technology sector (Healey and Woods, 2017;Metcalf and Moss, 2019), both deontological (Hoffman, 2017;den Hoven and Rooksby, 2008) and virtue-based approaches to ethics have been proposed. While the emergence of virtue-based technology ethics approaches has produced several endeavors based on Aristotle (Colton and Holmes, 2018;Vallor, 2010), it has also presented an opportunity to bring Eastern philosophy into the discourse.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four challenges to Confucian virtue ethics in technology

Bay

2021

JICES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose As interest in technology ethics is increasing, so is the interest in bringing schools of ethics from non-Western philosophical traditions to the field, particularly when it comes to information and communication technology. In light of this development and recent publications that result from it, this paper aims to present responds critically to recent work on Confucian virtue ethics (CVE) and technology. Design/methodology/approach Four critiques are presented as theoretical challenges to CVE in technology, claiming that current literature insufficiently addresses: overall applicability, collective ethics issues, epistemic overconfidence within technology corporations and amplification of epistemic overconfidence by the implementation of CVE. These challenges make use of general CVE literature and work on technology critique, political philosophy, epistemology and business ethics. Findings Implementing CVE in technology may yield some benefits, but these may be outweighed by other outcomes, include strengthening hierarchies, widening inequities, increasing, rather than limiting, predictive activity, personal data collection, misinformation, privacy violations and challenges to the democratic process. Originality/value Though not directly advocating against CVE, the paper reveals hitherto unidentified and serious issues that should be addressed before CVE are used to inform ethics guidelines or regulatory policies. It also serves as a foundation for further inquiry into how Eastern philosophy more broadly can inform technology ethics in the West.

show abstract

“…

The proposed paper presents an argument in favor of a Rawlsian approach to ethics for Internet technology companies (den Hoven & Rooksby, 2008;Hoffman, 2017). Ethics statements from such companies are analyzed and shown to be utilitarian and teleological in nature, and therefore in opposition to Rawls' theories of justice and fairness.

…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%