Abstract

This paper argues that the AI ethics has generally neglected the issues related to the science communication of AI. In particular, the article focuses on visual communication about AI and, more specifically, on the use of certain stock images in science communication about AI — in particular, those characterized by an excessive use of blue color and recurrent subjects, such as androgyne faces, half-flesh and half-circuit brains, and variations on Michelangelo’s The Creation of Adam. In the first section, the author refers to a “referentialist” ethics of science communication for an ethical assessment of these images. From this perspective, these images are unethical. While the ethics of science communication generally promotes virtues like modesty and humility, similar images are arrogant and overconfident. In the second section, the author uses French philosopher Jacques Rancière’s concepts of “distribution of the sensible,” “disagreement,” and “pensive image.” Rancière’s thought paves the way to a deeper critique of these images of AI. The problem with similar images is not their lack of reference to the “things themselves.” It rather lies in the way they stifle any possible forms of disagreement about AI. However, the author argues that stock images and other popular images of AI are not a problem per se, and they can also be a resource. This depends on the real possibility for these images to support forms of pensiveness. In the conclusion, the question is asked whether the kind of ethics or politics of AI images proposed in this article can be applied to AI ethics tout court.

Highlights

  • The main hypothesis of this article is that there is a blind spot in the current debate in AI ethics

  • Page 5 of 19 4 we briefly ask ourselves if the kind of ethics of AI images we propose in this article can be applied to AI ethics tout court

  • We have argued that there is a blind spot in the current debate about the ethics of AI

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The main hypothesis of this article is that there is a blind spot in the current debate in AI ethics. We are referring to the many popular (popular in the sense of something intended to suit the general public) visual representations of AI that one can find on the homepages of university departments and laboratories (some of which are considered to be leading in the field of AI), on the posters of academic events about AI, official research communications from public institutions, in specialized courses, on the cover of books, etc Many of these images are stock images, that is, pre-produced images made available for license by paying a fee to both the creators and the stock agencies managing the images.

Page 4 of 19
The Unethics of AI Images
Page 6 of 19
Page 8 of 19
Page 10 of 19
The Unpolitics15 of the Images of AI
Page 12 of 19
Page 14 of 19
Page 16 of 19
Conclusion
Page 18 of 19

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.