Epistemic Responsibility in the IT Society

276 views

Published on

A Trustful attitude towards communicated information is possible insofar there exist cognitive mechanisms, emotional dispositions, inherited norms, institutional cues that make us epistemically responsible.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
276
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Epistemic Responsibility in the IT Society

  1. 1. Epistemic Responsibility in the IT society Gloria Origgi, CNRS, Paris Workshop on Future Technology and Society, Brussels, November 19 th
  2. 2. Do you believe this?
  3. 3. And this:
  4. 4. Or this:
  5. 5. Or this:
  6. 6. Or this: J. Willis & A. Todorov (2006) "First Impressions", Psychological Science, vol. 17, n. 17
  7. 7. Or this: J. Willis & A. Todorov (2006) "First Impressions", Psychological Science, vol. 17, n. 17
  8. 8. Yes or No, but Why? <ul><li>In all these various examples you have reasoned in different ways to come to trust or not what was said. </li></ul><ul><li>These are examples of testimonial beliefs, things that we believe because we trust the source of information. </li></ul><ul><li>Still, as you have experienced just now, we do not passively trust, rather, we use various inferential strategies to work out a vigilant attitude towards our informants and the content they inform us about. </li></ul>
  9. 9. My Point: <ul><li>A Trustful attitude towards communicated information is possible insofar there exist cognitive mechanisms, emotional dispositions, inherited norms, institutional cues that make us epistemically responsible. </li></ul>
  10. 10. What does make us trust? <ul><li>Inference on the subject’s reliability </li></ul><ul><li>Inference on the content’s reliability </li></ul><ul><li>Internalized social norms of complying to authority (he is my master, thus I believe what he says..) </li></ul><ul><li>Socially distributed reputational cues </li></ul><ul><li>Robust signals </li></ul><ul><li>Emotional reactions </li></ul><ul><li>Moral commitments </li></ul>
  11. 11. Epistemic Vigilance is an Epistemic responsibility <ul><li>The burden of honesty and reliability is not only on the side of the speaker, but also of the receiver of the information whose duty is to know WHY she trust </li></ul><ul><li>An epistemic vigilant attitude not only towards the others but towards our own trustful attitudes is a requirement for a responsible acquisition of information from the social world. </li></ul>
  12. 12. What does it mean to be epistemically responsible? <ul><li>Check whether your practices of production and acquisition of information are based on reliable processes, or just on passively accepted social norms or humdrum cognitive habits </li></ul><ul><li>Ask yourself: Why do I trust a Google search, or a Harvard University Press book, or an authoritative voice? </li></ul>
  13. 13. An example of misplaced trust: the DOI attribution
  14. 14. Definition of DOI: <ul><li>A DOI® (Digital Object Identifier) name is an identifier (not a location) for an entity on digital networks. It provides a system for persistent and actionable identification and interoperable exchange of managed information on digital networks. Unique identifiers are essential for the management of information in any digital environment </li></ul>
  15. 15. Where do the DOIs come from? <ul><li>They were introduced in 2000 by the community of the semantic Web. </li></ul><ul><li>The aim was more intellectual than institutional: structuring and numbering metadata in order to make digital objects easier to identify, retrieve and interoperate. </li></ul>
  16. 16. The epistemic risks of DOIs <ul><li>Each organization that is involved in transactions of intellectual property may acquire DOI identifiers for its documents by meeting some standards in coding the metadata and by paying a fee for each document. Now, this system does not say anything about the scientific quality of a document. If I start today a publishing company and I have enough money to pay for the DOI attributions, all my publications will have a DOI number. Yet, it is becoming a social norm to consider “serious” web publications only the ones that have a DOI. </li></ul><ul><li> This may harm the overall system, and may block many intellectual projects of collaborative writing and multiple versioning of the documents of the Web. If I attribute a DOI to a document and then I makemodifications or leave other people to make modifications, I will need a new DOI for </li></ul>
  17. 17. Other examples <ul><li>Biases in Citation Index </li></ul><ul><li>Super-powers of journals such as Science and Nature </li></ul><ul><li>Biases in the search engines </li></ul><ul><li>etc, etc… </li></ul>
  18. 18. What would be a responsible way to produce authorities in the IT world of knowledge? <ul><li>Assessing credible procedures of endorsement of authority </li></ul><ul><li>Make them proliferate through the Web </li></ul><ul><li>Use light-assembled institutions at the European level that “label” their knowledge in an easily identifiable way. </li></ul>

×