6 found
Order:
See also
Geoff Keeling
Stanford University
  1. Why Trolley Problems Matter for the Ethics of Automated Vehicles.Geoff Keeling - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (1):293-307.
    This paper argues against the view that trolley cases are of little or no relevance to the ethics of automated vehicles. Four arguments for this view are outlined and rejected: the Not Going to Happen Argument, the Moral Difference Argument, the Impossible Deliberation Argument and the Wrong Question Argument. In making clear where these arguments go wrong, a positive account is developed of how trolley cases can inform the ethics of automated vehicles.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  2.  56
    Legal Necessity, Pareto Efficiency & Justified Killing in Autonomous Vehicle Collisions.Geoff Keeling - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (2):413-427.
    Suppose a driverless car encounters a scenario where harm to at least one person is unavoidable and a choice about how to distribute harms between different persons is required. How should the driverless car be programmed to behave in this situation? I call this the moral design problem. Santoni de Sio defends a legal-philosophical approach to this problem, which aims to bring us to a consensus on the moral design problem despite our disagreements about which moral principles provide the correct (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  3. On Algorithmic Fairness in Medical Practice.Thomas Grote & Geoff Keeling - 2022 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 31 (1):83-94.
    The application of machine-learning technologies to medical practice promises to enhance the capabilities of healthcare professionals in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment, of medical conditions. However, there is growing concern that algorithmic bias may perpetuate or exacerbate existing health inequalities. Hence, it matters that we make precise the different respects in which algorithmic bias can arise in medicine, and also make clear the normative relevance of these different kinds of algorithmic bias for broader questions about justice and fairness in healthcare. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. A Dilemma for Reasons Additivity.Geoff Keeling - forthcoming - Economics and Philosophy:1-23.
    This paper presents a dilemma for the additive model of reasons. Either the model accommodates disjunctive cases in which one ought to perform some act \phi just in case at least one of two factors obtains, or it accommodates conjunctive cases in which one ought to \phi just in case both of two factors obtains. The dilemma also arises in a revised additive model that accommodates imprecisely weighted reasons. There exist disjunctive and conjunctive cases. Hence the additive model is extensionally (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Building Machines That Learn and Think About Morality.Christopher Burr & Geoff Keeling - 2018 - In Proceedings of the Convention of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour (AISB 2018). Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour.
    Lake et al. propose three criteria which, they argue, will bring artificial intelligence (AI) systems closer to human cognitive abilities. In this paper, we explore the application of these criteria to a particular domain of human cognition: our capacity for moral reasoning. In doing so, we explore a set of considerations relevant to the development of AI moral decision-making. Our main focus is on the relation between dual-process accounts of moral reasoning and model-free/model-based forms of machine learning. We also discuss (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6.  99
    The Sensitivity Argument Against Child Euthanasia.Geoff Keeling - 2018 - Journal of Medical Ethics 44 (2):143-144.
    Is there a moral difference between euthanasia for terminally ill adults and euthanasia for terminally ill children? Luc Bovens considers five arguments to this effect, and argues that each is unsuccessful. In this paper, I argue that Bovens' dismissal of the sensitivity argument is unconvincing.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation