An (E)Affective Bind: Situated Affectivity and the Prospect of Affect Recognition

Abstract

Several prominent criticisms have recently challenged the possibility of algorithmically determining or recognising human affect. This paper ethically evaluates one underexplored avenue for overcoming such deficiencies in categorical affect recognition technologies (ARTs). Specifically, the emerging literature on “situated affectivity” offers valuable guidance on three fronts. First, it conceptually substantiates existing criticism by stressing the contextual dimensions of human affect. Second, in highlighting the breadth of information required for more accurate ARTs, it suggest that they may necessitate penetrating forms of surveillance the ethical literature has already provided good reason to resist. Third, it corroborates postphenomenological insights concerning the socially co-constituting character of technology; and thereby grounds the need for a “situated ethics” sensitive to the ways that ARTs might reconstruct human affectivity (and reinforce existing power hierarchies). The deep worry is that this concern is likely to persist even if concerns over accuracy and surveillance are mitigated. A detailed consideration of this novel ethical concern suggests that the ethically acceptable use of ARTs may only be possible in highly contained settings. Yet doubts over such containment places advocates of ARTs in a "double bind” they need to address.