Our use of language is subject to what is nowadays a particularly widespread ploy that Harry Frankfurt put down as "bullshitting". It involves very seriously talking nonsense, twaddle, poppycock, guff or hot air while pretending to describe or explain hard facts.
Paul Amselek's book sets out to expose this ploy more specifically in philosophy. He illustrates the standard instances of "philosophical bullshit" setting up a smokescreen, ducking and weaving, doubling down, talking double-talk rife in the philosophy of law and ethics as well as the philosophy of science. Indeed it is in this last domain that an extravagant archaic discourse still reigns supreme and safe from criticism with respect to the scientific approach and the laws of science, which are still conceived along the lines of juridical laws without our being clearly aware of it. At the same time, it is an opportunity for the author to shed new or harsher light on some crucial philosophical issues such as value judgments, interpretive freedom or the classical problem of induction.
This book aims to share the outcome of a series of scientific events, the goal of which was to identify – from a diachronic perspective – the socio-legal consequences of technologies and the foundations of their pre-eminence in public discourse. These two facets of technology are not unrelated; the pre-eminence of a society-wide technological narrative necessarily entails consequences on the law and what it seeks to achieve.
References to artificial intelligence (AI) and its disruptive effects have pervaded recent public discourse. Evidently not free of hidden marketing agendas, it is however surprising to observe a nearly ubiquitous participation in this discourse.
This book’s contributors recognize the formidable potential of AI, but remain equally aware of the corresponding risks; lack of transparency, systemic bias, discrimination, false positives, and privacy violations are only a few among the many risks examined throughout this book.