Abstract

This paper discusses the argument that the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies benefits the powerful few, focussing on their own existential concerns. The paper will narrow down the analysis of the argument to jurisprudence (i.e. the philosophy of law), considering also the historical context. The paper will discuss the construction of the legal system through the lens of political involvement of what one may want to consider to be powerful elites. Before discussing these aspects the paper will clarify the notion of “powerful elites”. In doing so the paper will be demonstrating that it is difficult to prove that the adoption of AI technologies is undertaken in a way which mainly serves a powerful class in society. Nevertheless, analysing the culture around AI technologies with regard to the nature of law with a philosophical and sociological focus demonstrates a utilitarian and authoritarian trend in the adoption of AI technologies. The paper will conclude by proposing an alternative, some might say practically unattainable, approach to the current legal system by looking into restorative justice for AI crimes, and how the ethics of care could be applied to AI technologies.

Highlights

  • Digital Preservation: The Open Library of Humanities and all its journals are digitally preserved in the CLOCKSS scholarly archive service

  • In doing so the paper will be demonstrating that it is difficult to prove that the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies is undertaken in a way which mainly serves a powerful class in society

  • The paper will conclude by proposing an alternative, some might say practically unattainable, approach to the current legal system by looking into restorative justice for AI crimes, and how the ethics of care could be applied to AI technologies

Read more

Summary

Adnan Hadzi

This paper discusses the argument that the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies benefits the powerful few, focussing on their own existential concerns. In order to lay the foundations for a discussion around the argument that the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies benefits the powerful few (Chaslot, 2016; Morozov, 2018), focussing on their own existential concerns (Busby, 2018; Sample, 2018a), the paper will narrow down the analysis of the argument to social justice and jurisprudence (i.e. the philosophy of law), considering the historical context. Concerning what constitutes AI crimes the paper uses the criteria given in King et al’s paper Artificial Intelligence Crime: An Interdisciplinary Analysis of Foreseeable Threats and Solutions (King, Aggarwal, Taddeo, & Floridi, 2018), where King et al coin the term AI crime, mapping five areas in which AI might, in the foreseeable future, commit crimes, namely: Having those potential AI crimes in mind, the paper will discuss the construction of the legal system through the lens of political involvement of what one may want to consider to be powerful elites. In conclusion the paper will discuss affect (Olivier, 2012; Wilson, 2011) and humanised artificial intelligence with regards to the emotion of shame, when dealing with AI crimes

Legal Positivism and Natural Law
The Disciplinary Power of Artificial Intelligence
Author Information
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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