66,272 research outputs found

    Impacts of GSS on Moral Discourse: An Argumentation Analysis

    Get PDF
    Although ethical decision making is a key concern of organizations, the impacts of IT on ethical discourse is an underexplored topic. The laboratory experiment reported in this paper examines the impacts of the use of group support systems (GSSs) on moral discourse. Drawing upon Toulmin’s (1958) model of argumentation and Kohlberg’s (1976) framework of stages of moral reasoning, we used the technique of argumentation mapping (Fletcher and Huff 1990) to analyze group discussions of scenarios involving music piracy and hacktivism (computer hacking for a social cause) by GSS-supported and face-to-face groups. The results indicate that use of GSS can have a significant impact on the extent and diversity of the argumentation contributed during group discussion involving ethical dilemmas, including the number of grounds and rebuttals and the number of unique stages of moral reasoning underpinning the argumentation

    Formalizing value-guided argumentation for ethical systems design

    Get PDF
    The persuasiveness of an argument depends on the values promoted and demoted by the position defended. This idea, inspired by Perelman’s work on argumentation, has become a prominent theme in artificial intelligence research on argumentation since the work by Hafner and Berman on teleological reasoning in the law, and was further developed by Bench-Capon in his value-based argumentation frameworks. One theme in the study of value-guided argumentation is the comparison of values. Formal models involving value comparison typically use either qualitative or quantitative primitives. In this paper, techniques connecting qualitative and quantitative primitives recently developed for evidential argumentation are applied to value-guided argumentation. By developing the theoretical understanding of intelligent systems guided by embedded values, the paper is a step towards ethical systems design, much needed in these days of ever more pervasive AI techniques. Keywords Argumentation Ethical systems Teleological reasoning Value

    Arguing For the Ethics of an Ad: An Application of Multi-Modal Argumentation Theory

    Get PDF
    In addition to functions traditionally ascribed to the socio-linguistic practice of arguing for a thesis, we can add: determining whether an advertisement is ethical. Ads regularly use fallacy and exaggeration, but when an ad uses argumentation that is based in unfair, damaging, dangerous fallacy, we may question its ethics. This paper uses Gilbert\u27s model of Multi-Modal Argumentation to decide whether the arguments underlying an advertisement make it an ethical one

    Ethical argumentation, objectivity, and bias

    Get PDF
    On one account, the moral point of view is impartial, hence in this sense objective. On a different account, morality sometimes seems to recommend partiality, hence, in one sense of \u27partiality,\u27 bias. Still another view says that in some cases morality is neutral between impartiality and partiality in choosing between alternative actions. My main concern will be with impartiality and partiality (hence with objectivity and bias in corresponding senses of these words) in relation to arguments of the kind presented in first-order ethical argumentation (hence in relation to first-order ethical arguments). Part of my discussion will focus on one type of theory of practical reasons; theories of this type are objective in as much as they hold that practical reasons are based on values that are objective in the sense of being mind-independent. I will refer to selected philosophers, including Wayne Sumner, Russ Shafer-Landau, Derek Parfit and Peter Singer

    Euthanasia and the Teaching of Argumentation in Chile

    Get PDF
    This paper reports on a research project about Chilean students’ argumentation competency. Our thesis is that ethical issues are an impediment for the teaching of argumentation at high school level. To prove this, we analyze students’ discussions and we compare them with standard philosophical discussions to show the breach between them. We use the pragma-dialectical approach to contrast the different kinds of argumentation

    The Jiminy Advisor: Moral Agreements Among Stakeholders Based on Norms and Argumentation

    Full text link
    An autonomous system is constructed by a manufacturer, operates in a society subject to norms and laws, and is interacting with end users. All of these actors are stakeholders affected by the behavior of the autonomous system. We address the challenge of how the ethical views of such stakeholders can be integrated in the behavior of the autonomous system. We propose an ethical recommendation component, which we call Jiminy, that uses techniques from normative systems and formal argumentation to reach moral agreements among stakeholders. Jiminy represents the ethical views of each stakeholder by using normative systems, and has three ways of resolving moral dilemmas involving the opinions of the stakeholders. First, Jiminy considers how the arguments of the stakeholders relate to one another, which may already resolve the dilemma. Secondly, Jiminy combines the normative systems of the stakeholders such that the combined expertise of the stakeholders may resolve the dilemma. Thirdly, and only if these two other methods have failed, Jiminy uses context-sensitive rules to decide which of the stakeholders take preference. At the abstract level, these three methods are characterized by the addition of arguments, the addition of attacks among arguments, and the removal of attacks among arguments. We show how Jiminy can be used not only for ethical reasoning and collaborative decision making, but also for providing explanations about ethical behavior

    Speaking of South Park

    Get PDF
    This paper deals with the new cult cartoon series, South Park . While reviled as vulgar and likely to lead children astray, it is in fact a fertile field of ethical and logical argumentation. The paper analyses in detail the argumentation of one epi sode, entitled An elephant makes love to a pig and shows how it can be used to teach reasoning skills

    A situation of ethical limbo and preimplantation genetic diagnosis

    Get PDF
    In my previous paper I argued that if in vitro fertilization (IVF) is legal and practiced there is no moral ground to object to legalization of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). My opponent raises an objection that my paper “fails to address the ethical argumentation of one key opponent of IVF – the Catholic Church”. In this reply I show that her/his thesis that embryos created during IVF are in ‘ethical limbo’ and “fall outside the moral universe of Christian ethics” does not undermine my argumentation and masks the serious problem Catholics have with the moral status of early embryos
    corecore