The Language Labyrinth: Constructive Critique on the Terminology Used in the AI Discourse
Fuente:
arXiv
Salvato in:
| Autore principale: | |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2023
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866908288766967808 |
|---|---|
| author | Rehak, Rainer |
| author_facet | Rehak, Rainer |
| contents | In the interdisciplinary field of artificial intelligence (AI) the problem of clear terminology is especially momentous. This paper claims, that AI debates are still characterised by a lack of critical distance to metaphors like 'training', 'learning' or 'deciding'. As consequence, reflections regarding responsibility or potential use-cases are greatly distorted. Yet, if relevant decision-makers are convinced that AI can develop an 'understanding' or properly 'interpret' issues, its regular use for sensitive tasks like deciding about social benefits or judging court cases looms. The chapter argues its claim by analysing central notions of the AI debate and tries to contribute by proposing more fitting terminology and hereby enabling more fruitful debates. It is a conceptual work at the intersection of critical computer science and philosophy of language. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2307_10292 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2023 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | The Language Labyrinth: Constructive Critique on the Terminology Used in the AI Discourse Rehak, Rainer Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence Computation and Language Neural and Evolutionary Computing K.4.0; K.4.1; K.4.2; I.2.0; I.2.1; K.4.3 In the interdisciplinary field of artificial intelligence (AI) the problem of clear terminology is especially momentous. This paper claims, that AI debates are still characterised by a lack of critical distance to metaphors like 'training', 'learning' or 'deciding'. As consequence, reflections regarding responsibility or potential use-cases are greatly distorted. Yet, if relevant decision-makers are convinced that AI can develop an 'understanding' or properly 'interpret' issues, its regular use for sensitive tasks like deciding about social benefits or judging court cases looms. The chapter argues its claim by analysing central notions of the AI debate and tries to contribute by proposing more fitting terminology and hereby enabling more fruitful debates. It is a conceptual work at the intersection of critical computer science and philosophy of language. |
| title | The Language Labyrinth: Constructive Critique on the Terminology Used in the AI Discourse |
| topic | Computers and Society Artificial Intelligence Computation and Language Neural and Evolutionary Computing K.4.0; K.4.1; K.4.2; I.2.0; I.2.1; K.4.3 |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.10292 |