Abstract Philosophical literature generally highlights three different aspects or dimensions of responsibility: 1. the attribution of authorship of actions and the liability of the actor for these actions; 2. the attribution of a duty of care for certain tasks or areas of responsibility; and finally 3. the obligation to justify one’s own behaviour and actions with good reasons. The discussion about the development and the use of artificial intelligence currently focuses on the first and, to some extent, the third aspect. However, the rapid pace of development and the now omnipresent use of AI also require ongoing critical examination and reflection on the normative framework. Responsibility must therefore be understood more broadly: with regard to the development and use of artificial intelligence, we bear a discursive shared responsibility that involves examining the development and use of AI systems against the yardstick of justice, as well as the normative framework itself that guides us in the development and use of AI systems.
Eva Buddeberg (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: