AI-Based Decisions and Disappearance of Law
Based on the philosophical anthropology of Paul Ricoeur, the article examines, using the example of AI-based decisions, how the concept of responsibility changes under the influence of artificial intelligence, what a reverse effect this conceptual shift has on our moral experience in general, and what consequences it has for law. The problem of AI-based decisions is said to illustrate the general trend of transformation of the concept of responsibility, which consists in replacing personal responsibility with a system of collective insurance against risks and disappearing of the capacity for responsibility from the structure of our experience, which, in turn, makes justice and law impossible.
Artificial Intelligence; AI-based Decisions; Responsibility; Experience of Law; Paul Ricoeur
241 – 267
Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University
Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University
 Angwin, J. et al. (2016) Machine Bias. There’s Software Used Across the Country to Predict Future Criminals. And it’s Biased Against Blacks. ProPublica, 23th May. Available from: https://www.propublica.org/article/machine-bias-risk-assessments-in-criminal-sentencing [Accessed 24 October 2020].
 Arendt, H. (1998/1958) The Human Condition. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
 Bărbulescu v. Romania, 61496/08,  ECHR 61,  ECHR 742,  ECHR 754.
 Bleske-Rechek, A. et al. (2010) Evolution and the Trolley Problem: People Save Five Over One unless the One is Young, Genetically Related, or a Romantic Partner. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 4 (3), pp. 115-127.
 Cofone, I. (2019) Algorithmic Discrimination is an Information Problem. Hastings Law Journal, 70, pp. 1389-1444.
 Da Silva, S., Matsushita, R. and De Sousa, M. (2016) Utilitarian Moral Judgments are Cognitively Too Demanding. Open Access Library Journal, 3 (2). Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1102380.
 Groher, W., Rademacher, F.-W. and Csillaghy, A. (2019) Leveraging AI-based Decision Support for Opportunity Analysis. Technology Innovation Management Review, 9 (12), pp. 29-35. Available from: http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1289.
 Floridi, L. and Sanders, J. (2004) On the Morality of Artificial Agents. Minds and Machines, 14, pp. 349-379. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:MIND.0000035461.63578.9d.
 Foot, P. (1967) The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Oxford Review, 5, pp. 5-15.
 Habermas, J. (2003) The Future of Human Nature. Cambridge: Polity Press.
 Kant, I. (2003) The Critique of Pure Reason. Available from: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4280/4280-h/4280-h.htm [Accessed 23 October 2020].
 Klenk, M. (2020) Digital Well-being and Manipulation Online. In C. Burr and L. Floridi (eds.) Ethics of Digital Well-Being: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 81-100.
 Mazur, J. (2019) Automated Decision-making and the Precautionary Principle in EU Law. Baltic Journal of European Studies, 9 (4), pp. 3-18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1515/bjes-2019-0035.
 Moor, J. (2006) The Nature, Importance, and Difficulty of Machine Ethics. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21 (4), pp. 18-21.
 Phillips-Wren, G. and Jain, L. (2006) Artificial Intelligence for Decision Making. In B. Gabrys, R.J. Howlett and L.C. Jain (eds.) Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems. KES 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4252. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 531-536. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/11893004_69.
 Ricoeur, P. (1994) Oneself as Another. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
 Ricoeur, P. (2000) The Just. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
 Sharkey, A. (2017) Can We Program or Train Robots to Be Good? Ethics and Information Technology. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-017-9425-5.
 Susser, D., Roessler, B. and Nissenbaum, H. (2019) Technology, Autonomy, and Manipulation. Internet Policy Review, 8 (2). Available from: https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.2.1410.
 Thomson, J. (1985) The Trolley Problem. Yale Law Journal, 94, pp. 1395-1415. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/796133.
 Vo v. France, 53924/00,  ECHR 326, (2005) 40 EHRR 12.
 Weinreb, Lloyd L. (2004) A Secular Theory of Natural Law. Fordham Law Review, 72 (6), pp. 2287-2300. Available from: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3990&context=flr [Accessed 23 October 2020].
 Williams, B., Brooks, C. and Shmargad, Y. (2018) How Algorithms Discriminate Based on Data They Lack: Challenges,Solutions, and Policy Implications. Journal of Information Policy, 8, pp. 78-115.
1. Prejudice on discretion in law enforcement of financial legal provisions
Ûridičnij časopis Nacìonalʹnoï akademìï vnutrìšnìh sprav vol: 13, issue: 1, year: 2023
Copyright (c) 2022 Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology