Book•
The Dialogical Mind: Common Sense and Ethics
01 Sep 2016-
TL;DR: In this paper, Markova presents an ethics of dialogicality as an alternative to the narrow perspective of individualism and cognitivism that has traditionally dominated the field of social psychology.
Abstract: Dialogue has become a central theoretical concept in human and social sciences as well as in professions such as education, health, and psychotherapy. This 'dialogical turn' emphasises the importance of social relations and interaction to our behaviour and how we make sense of the world; hence the dialogical mind is the mind in interaction with others - with individuals, groups, institutions, and cultures in historical perspectives. Through a combination of rigorous theoretical work and empirical investigation, Markova presents an ethics of dialogicality as an alternative to the narrow perspective of individualism and cognitivism that has traditionally dominated the field of social psychology. The dialogical perspective, which focuses on interdependencies among the self and others, offers a powerful theoretical basis to comprehend, analyse, and discuss complex social issues. Markova considers the implications of dialogical epistemology both in daily life and in professional practices involving problems of communication, care, and therapy.
Citations
More filters
79 citations
09 May 2022
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors trace the historical roots and current landmark work that have been shaping the field and categorize these works under three broad umbrellas: (i) those grounded in Western canonical philosophy, (ii) mathematical and statistical methods, and (iii) those emerging from critical data/algorithm/information studies.
Abstract: How has recent AI Ethics literature addressed topics such as fairness and justice in the context of continued social and structural power asymmetries? We trace both the historical roots and current landmark work that have been shaping the field and categorize these works under three broad umbrellas: (i) those grounded in Western canonical philosophy, (ii) mathematical and statistical methods, and (iii) those emerging from critical data/algorithm/information studies. We also survey the field and explore emerging trends by examining the rapidly growing body of literature that falls under the broad umbrella of AI Ethics. To that end, we read and annotated peer-reviewed papers published over the past four years in two premier conferences: FAccT and AIES. We organize the literature based on an annotation scheme we developed according to three main dimensions: whether the paper deals with concrete applications, use-cases, and/or people’s lived experience; to what extent it addresses harmed, threatened, or otherwise marginalized groups; and if so, whether it explicitly names such groups. We note that although the goals of the majority of FAccT and AIES papers were often commendable, their consideration of the negative impacts of AI on traditionally marginalized groups remained shallow. Taken together, our conceptual analysis and the data from annotated papers indicate that the field would benefit from an increased focus on ethical analysis grounded in concrete use-cases, people’s experiences, and applications as well as from approaches that are sensitive to structural and historical power asymmetries.
33 citations
TL;DR: This article argued that ubiquitous Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) systems are close descendants of the Cartesian and Newtonian worldview in so far as they are tools that fundamentally sort, categorize, and classify the world, and forecast the future.
Abstract: On the one hand, complexity science and enactive and embodied cognitive science approaches emphasize that people, as complex adaptive systems, are ambiguous, indeterminable, and inherently unpredictable. On the other, Machine Learning (ML) systems that claim to predict human behaviour are becoming ubiquitous in all spheres of social life. I contend that ubiquitous Artificial Intelligence (AI) and ML systems are close descendants of the Cartesian and Newtonian worldview in so far as they are tools that fundamentally sort, categorize, and classify the world, and forecast the future. Through the practice of clustering, sorting, and predicting human behaviour and action, these systems impose order, equilibrium, and stability to the active, fluid, messy, and unpredictable nature of human behaviour and the social world at large. Grounded in complexity science and enactive and embodied cognitive science approaches, this article emphasizes why people, embedded in social systems, are indeterminable and unpredictable. When ML systems "pick up" patterns and clusters, this often amounts to identifying historically and socially held norms, conventions, and stereotypes. Machine prediction of social behaviour, I argue, is not only erroneous but also presents real harm to those at the margins of society.
32 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the importance of generalisation from dialogical single case studies is explained and justified, drawing on historical, theoretical and cultural knowledge, and explaining the meaning of generalization from case studies.
Abstract: Drawing on historical, theoretical and cultural knowledge, this introduction explains and justifies the importance of generalisation from dialogical single case studies. We clarify the meaning of d...
30 citations
Cites background or methods from "The Dialogical Mind: Common Sense a..."
...As such, tensions between the holistic nature of the uniqueness and dynamics of ontologically interdependent Self–Other units, and the methodological tools with which such units are studied, remain (Grossen, 2010; Marková, 2016)....
[...]
...Other units, and the methodological tools with which such units are studied, remain (Grossen, 2010; Marková, 2016)....
[...]
...…to study dynamic and ethical interdependent units does not approach the construction of their case using a method of sampling that treats the Self as something other than an ethical being from whose unique communication with Others something important can be known (see also Marková, 2016)....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: A case study tracks the journey of one high-profile study of neurobiological sex differences from its scientific publication through various layers of the public domain and suggests that embedding stereotype patterns in neuroscience may intensify their rhetorical potency by lending them the epistemic authority of science.
Abstract: Neuroscience research on sex difference is currently a controversial field, frequently accused of purveying a 'neurosexism' that functions to naturalise gender inequalities. However, there has been little empirical investigation of how information about neurobiological sex difference is interpreted within wider society. This paper presents a case study that tracks the journey of one high-profile study of neurobiological sex differences from its scientific publication through various layers of the public domain. A content analysis was performed to ascertain how the study was represented in five domains of communication: the original scientific article, a press release, the traditional news media, online reader comments and blog entries. Analysis suggested that scientific research on sex difference offers an opportunity to rehearse abiding cultural understandings of gender. In both scientific and popular contexts, traditional gender stereotypes were projected onto the novel scientific information, which was harnessed to demonstrate the factual truth and normative legitimacy of these beliefs. Though strains of misogyny were evident within the readers' comments, most discussion of the study took pains to portray the sexes' unique abilities as equal and 'complementary'. However, this content often resembled a form of benevolent sexism, in which praise of women's social-emotional skills compensated for their relegation from more esteemed trait-domains, such as rationality and productivity. The paper suggests that embedding these stereotype patterns in neuroscience may intensify their rhetorical potency by lending them the epistemic authority of science. It argues that the neuroscience of sex difference does not merely reflect, but can actively shape the gender norms of contemporary society.
65 citations
TL;DR: The authors argue that the political philosophy that Arendt developed is far from being "conservative" since it is heavily influenced by her existentialist convictions, and that this unusual blend of a traditional view of authority with an existentialist approach to politics shapes her ideas on education.
Abstract: This chapter presents Hannah Arendt's conservatism as a unique approach that resists the reactionary tendencies of many conservative arguments. It first shows that Arendt's conception of authority shares a number of fundamental assumptions with the mainstream conservative view of authority. However, the political philosophy that Arendt developed is far from being "conservative" since it is heavily influenced by her existentialist convictions. This unusual blend of a traditional view of authority with an existentialist approach to politics shapes her ideas on education. The chapter compares Arendt's view on authority in education to mainstream conservative approaches and argue that her view constitutes a genuine alternative to these approaches, one that throws fresh light on the meaning of conservatism in education. Finally, it explores the implications of Arendt's insights on authority for the debate on democratic education. The chapter also shows that, unlike the views of two mainstream conservatives, Arendt's conception of pedagogical authority has a number of important implications for democratic education.
59 citations