Philosophy & Ethics
Module 4: Virtue ethics and Care ethics
Copyright By PowCoder代写 加微信 powcoder
This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of the University of Melbourne in accordance with section 113P of the Copyright Act 1968 (Act).
The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act.
Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act.
Do not remove this notice
Learning outcomes
At the end of this module, you should be able to:
• Describe the ethical theories of virtue ethics and care ethics
• Contrast these theories with utilitarianism and deontology
• Begin to apply these ethical theories to a case study involving AI
Images herein: Unsplash, Wiki
Ethics theories
1. Utilitarianism – consequence based
2. Deontology – rule based
3. Virtue ethics – character based
4. Ethics of care – relationship based
Principlism – simplified integration of 1-4
Images herein: Wiki commons and unsplash
Virtue Ethics
Ethics of character
Duties and consequences too narrow:
more to ethical life
: vestige of religious rules (Christian commandments)
Ancient West: Aristotle (384-322 BCE)-
Nichomachean Ethics
Ancient East: Confucius, Buddha (both 6- 5th BCE)
Being a kind of person — praiseworthy, warrants respect, emulation
Ethics: aims not just at right action, but good way of being
Deontology/consequentialism: ignore centrality of feeling/emotion/attitude
Aretaic ethics: excellence of character (cf. intellect)
Kant: shopkeeper not ripping-off customers: pure duty/good will vs. caring about
Responsible Wellbeing https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/focusing-on-virtues-and-character-strengths-probably-the- smallest-but-most-decisive-step-towards-c36baaff6325
Justice Generosity Compassion Courage Temperance Gratitude Honesty Trustworthy Love
Glad for others’ success Humility
Stingy Callousness/cruelty Cowardice
No self-control/greed Ingratitude Mendacity Untrustworthy Hate/Indifference Envy
Impatience
Aristotle: Virtues (and Vices)
Dispositions or traits
Cultivated over time
Habit – settled dispositions
Trained as children – reward/punish/modeling
Can learn these traits
Can practice to get better (towards perfection) or worse (corrupted)
Right feeling, right action, right way, right amount, to right people
Very context dependent
Kant: a good will/follow duty (NOT feeling/inclination) Aristotle: right attitudes/motivations/emotions Example: Visit sick friend
Good friend
Aristotle: Doctrine of Golden Mean
Right feeling/action/thoughts
Character traits: on a spectrum Virtues: the sweet spot
Excess and deficiency = vice Affected by context
Example: lazy cheating student steals your hard work
How should you react and feel? What is the virtue here? The vice(s)?
Indifference—Righteous indignation—Spite
Trust in AI?
Gullible—-Right trust—Cynical
https://www.itpro.com/technology/34263/can-you-trust-ai
productiveflourishing.com
Relation to duty
Criticism: VE doesn’t tell us what to do, only how to be
• Practicalwisdom(virtue)
• Applymoralideas/rulescontextually
• VEversatile,flexible,sensitivetosituations
What a virtuous person would do/
• Howdoweknowthat?
• Wefirstlearnfromeducation,training,school, parents
• Andwelaterlooktomoralexemplars
• Moralrulesfollow
RosalindHursthouse(1943-)
Flourishing: the good life
Aristotle: virtues are constitutive of good life Example:
Ben – pretends to be virtuous, but is greedy, callous, unjust, dishonest, unfaithful and has loads of fun
Lei – virtuous and good, but is poor and struggles with chronic illness
Without virtues: your life goes badly, even if rich, famous, successful
Ethical relationships part of good life Aristotle: happiness = flourishing =
eudaimonia
Socrates: ‘better to suffer evil than to do it’
: Techno-virtues
• “technological convergence: discrete technologies merging…magnify[ing] their scope and power”
• Need “context-adaptive moral reasoning” – Phronesis. Not broad rules e.g. Kantian/U
• Technology
• Growing techno-social opacity
• Unpredictable consequences
• Future individuals – human, nonhuman
Need techno-social wisdom Has trans-cultural resonance
Criticism of VE (from U and D)
Virtuous people still need to act on/for reasons
Reasons include rules, duties, principles, concern for consequences/utility
No specific guidance on moral dilemmas
Duty or consequences are primary Character only valuable instrumentally
Care Ethics
Feminist ethics
: Moral development of children
Male vs female responses
Masculine vs feminine perspective Masculine: “ethics of justice” and “rights”
Kholberg: Masculine higher – based in detached thinking, rules, principles, consequences
In a Different Voice (1982)
Feminine voice – not equal to “gender”
Cf. rationalism, principles, severe impartiality, lack of emotion
Very critical of U and D!
Relational and interpersonal – emotions and actions
Attending, listening, loving, feeling, taking responsibility
Recognising vulnerability, powerlessness Protecting relationships
Joan Tronto
Care involves:
• (1) attentiveness: proclivity to become aware of need
• (2) responsibility: willingness to respond need
• (3) competence: skill providing good successful care
• (4) responsiveness: consideration of the position of others as they see it [empathy] and recognition of the potential for abuse in care
Care begins in close relations e.g. family Often face to face and embodied
Relationship: carer and cared-for – interdependence
All: might suddenly need care
Self-sufficiency myth (cf. Kant’s autonomous person)
Essential – healthy society
Part of VE?
But care central to good character/action
Criticisms of CE
Too vague (like VE)
CE: can also use principles, rules
Romanticises motherhood? Slave morality?
– Depicts carers (often women) as too self-sacrificing?
CE: Care should be mutual, not women only; carers need care too
Criticisms
Feminineperspectiveastereotype?
– Many women stress impartial justice; men who stress care CE: not saying that care is completely gendered
Parochial to own people/circle? Need impartial justice?
• To strangers, third-world, intersectional oppressions (e.g. black women)
CE: True, care often stronger for those we are in special relations with. But: Care can lead to and be involved in justice (e.g. view others as children, parents, brothers, sisters in need of care)
Principlism
• Distill theories into handy principles for AI ethics
• Midlevel principles: b/w theory and detailed rules
• Theory can guide midlevel principles
Principlism:
4 principles +1
Derived from medical ethics
1. Non-maleficence – do no harm
• Predict harm, avoid causing harm, minimize harm, short and long term
2. Beneficence – do good
• Anticipate good outcomes, short and long term
3. Respect autonomy – respect people’s values, choices, life plans
• Understand what others’ value, don’t override their choices, be honest,
Principlism
4. Justice – fairness
• Distribute benefits and harms fairly, fair processes, don’t unfairly discriminate
4+1. Explicability – transparency and accountability (Floridi*)
• Complements the 4 principles
• Ensure those potentially impacted have sufficient understanding of the AI and that relevant people are held to account
Principles: need to be balanced against on another; all are ‘equal’
*Floridi, Luciano, et al. “AI4People—an ethical framework for a good AI society: opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations.” Minds and Machines 28.4 (2018): 689-707.
Explicability
程序代写 CS代考 加微信: powcoder QQ: 1823890830 Email: powcoder@163.com