ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: MYTHOLOGIES OF WESTERN SCIENTIFIC CONTENT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22394/1996-0522-2023-1-16-25Keywords:
НБИК-конвергенция, artificial intelligence, trend, mythologeme, NBIC convergenceAbstract
Introduction. Artificial intelligence is a trend of NBIC-convergence and information technologies in particular. Since the 70s of the 20th century it has been a subject of intense debate in the scientific community. A direct indicator of the importance of the topic is the publication dynamics and the annual increase in the number of indexed articles. According to the statistics, Western social sciences are in the top five industry leaders. The purpose of the study is to analyze the Scopus database and identify the key mythologems of the scientific discourse of social sciences (in the field of artificial intelligence). The latter go beyond the boundaries of research norms and standards and express non-reflective research intentions. Methods. The reference base of scientific articles includes works published during the decade (2010—2020). Methods for detecting verbal markers and content analysis were used. At the same time, the emphasis was mainly placed not on quantitative, but on qualitative analytics as well. The basis for the choice of markers was the frequency of their use in abstracts (abstracts), headings (titles) and keywords. The selection of verbal markers was made in accordance with two conditionally designated categories: «trends», or frequency engineering, technical and social and humanitarian terms, expressing the direction of research practices and «mythologemes», or elements of a secondary semiotic system. Scientific novelty of the study. Scientific novelty is due to the specification of the research subject. In the West, the direction of the so-called «Technological mythology», which focuses mainly on the discourses of art and ideological documents is being developed. The analytics of scientific content makes it possible to remove the existing researchlimitations of the subject and identify prospects for further study of modern mythology. Content analysis made it possible to identify some extremely general formulations of technological mythologemes, which can be refined and concretized. Results. Following the results of the study, a description of three metatrends was made — technological, social and anthropological. All key directions within the boundaries of each trend are listed. At the same time, it is argued that the anthropotrend has a relatively smaller share in the discourse of Western social sciences. As a debatable aspect of the study, five scientific mythologemes were identified and conditionally designated. Interpretations and characteristic examples of the functioning of each are offered. Conclusion. The technological trend is constituted by the data of technical sciences and engineering developments with a social orientation. Sociotrend is determined by the spectrum of technology application areas. The conclusion is made about the diffusion of two trends and the discourses serving these trends. Discursively, the technotrend serves to construct a strictly scientific discourse based not on abstract, but on specific and precise propositions. Particular attention is paid to the discursive mainstream of «smartization», which is characteristic of the scientific content of the second decade of the 21st century. Emphasis is placed on the anthropological risks of extrapolating «smartization» to specialized practices.Downloads
References
1. Аршинов, В. И. Социальное измерение NBIC-междисциплинарности / В. И. Аршинов // Философские науки. — 2010. — № 6. — С. 22—35.
2. Фейербах, Л. Сущность христианства / Л. Фейербах // Сочинения : в 2 т. Т. 2. — М.: Наука, 1995. — 425 с.
3. Шваб, К. Четвертая промышленная революция / К. Шваб. — М. : Эксмо, 2018. — 288 с.
4. Allam, Z. On big data, artificial intelligence and smart cities / Z. Allam // Cities. — 2019. — Vol. 89. — Pp. 80-91.
5. Brayford, K. Myth and technology: Finding philosophy’s role in technological change / K. Brayford // Human Affair. — 2020. — Vol. 30,
iss. 4. — Pp. 526-534.
6. Duan, Y. Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era of Big Data — evolution, challenges and research agenda / Y. Duan // International Journal of Information Management. — 2019. — Vol. 48. — Pp. 63—71.
7. Farooq, A. Artificial intelligence based smart diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment / A. Farooq // 2017
International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2), 14—17 Sept. 2017.
8. Fjelland, R. Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized / R. Fjelland // Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. — 2020. — Vol. 7. — Iss. 1.
9. Goralski, M. Artificial intelligence and sustainable development / M. Goralski // International Journal of Management Education. — 2020. — Vol. 18. — Iss. 1.
10. London, A. J. Artificial Intelligence and Black-Box Medical Decisions: Accuracy versus Explainability / A. J. London // Hastings Center Republic. — 2019. — Vol. 49. — Iss. 1. — Pp. 15—21.
11. Makridakis, S. The forthcoming Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution: Its impact on society and firms / S. Makridakis // Futures. — 2017. — V. 90. — Pp. 46-60.
12. Miller, T. Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences / T. Miller // Artificial Intelligence. — 2019. — Vol. 267. — Pp. 1-38.
13. Mosco, V. The Digital Sublime: Myth, Power, and Cyberspace / V. Mosco. — Cambridge, MA : MIT Press, 2004. — 230 p.
14. Natale, S. Imagining the thinking machine: Technological myths and the rise of artificial intelligence / S. Natale // Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies. — 2020. — Vol. 26. —
Iss. 1. — Pp. 3—18.
15. Reis, J. Artificial Intelligence Research and Its Contributions to the European Union’s Political Governance: Comparative Study between Member / J. Reis // Social Science. — 2020. — Vol. 9. — Iss. 11. — Pp. 1—17.
16. Ryan, M. In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability / M. Ryan // Science and Engineering Ethics. — 2020. — Vol. 26. —
Pp. 2749—2767.
17. Shneiderman, B. Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence: Reliable, Safe & Trustworthy / B. Shneiderman // International Journal of Human—Computer Interaction. — 2020. — Vol. 36. — Iss. 6.
18. Singh, S. Convergence of blockchain and artificial intelligence in IoT network for the sustainable smart city / S. Singh // Sustainable cities and society. — 2020. — Vol. 63. — P. 102364.
19. Timms, M. Letting Artificial Intelligence in Education Out of the Box: Educational Cobots and Smart Classrooms / M. Timms // International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. — 2016. — Vol. 26. — Pp. 701—712.
20. Zawacki-Richter, O. Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applicationsin higher education — where are the educators? / O. Zawacki-Richter // International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. — 2019. — Vol. 16. — Iss. 39.
1. Arshinov V. I. (2010) Social’noe izmerenie NBIC-mezhdisciplinarnosti [The Social Dimension of the NBIC Interdisciplinarity]. Filosofskie nauki, no. 6, pp. 22-35 [in Rus].
2. Fejerbah L. (1995) Sushchnost’ hristianstva [The Essence of Christianity]. Moscow, Nauka, 425 p. [in Rus].
3. Shvab K. (2018) Chetvertaya promyshlennaya revolyuciya [The Fourth Industrial Revolution]. Moscow, Eksmo, 288 p. [in Rus].
4. Allam Z. (2019) On big data, artificial intelligence and smart cities. Cities, no. 89, pp. 80-91 DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2019.01.032. [in Eng].
5. Brayford K. (2020) Myth and technology: Finding philosophy’s role in technological change. Human Affairs, no 30(4), pp. 526-534. DOI: 10.1515/humaff-2020-0045. [in Eng].
6. Duan Y. (2019) Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era of Big Data — evolution, challenges and research agenda. International Journal of Information Management, no. 48, pp. 63-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.01.021 [in Eng].
7. Farooq A. (2017) Artificial intelligence based smart diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. 2017 International Smart Cities Conference (ISC2). DOI: 10.1109/ISC2.2017.8090871 [in Eng].
8. Fjelland R. (2020) Why general artificial intelligence will not be realized. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, no. 7(1). DOI:
10.1057/s41599-020-0494-4 [in Eng].
9. Goralski M.A. (2020) Artificial intelligence and sustainable development. International Journal of Management Education, no. 18(1).
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijme.2019.100330 [in Eng].
10. London A. J. (2019) Artificial Intelligence and Black-Box Medical Decisions: Accuracy versus Explainability. Hastings Center Republic,
no. 49(1), pp. 15-21. DOI: 10.1002/hast.973 [in Eng].
11. Makridakis S. (2017) The forthcoming Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution: Its impact on society and firms. Futures, no. 90, pp. 46-
60. DOI: 10.1016/j.futures.2017.03.006|[in Eng].
12. Miller T. (2019) Explanation in artificial intelligence: Insights from the social sciences. Artificial Intelligence, no. 267, pp. 1-38 DOI:
10.1016/j.artint.2018.07.007 [in Eng].
13. Mosco V. (2004) The Digital Sublime: Myth, Power, and Cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 230 p. [in Eng].
14. Natale S. (2020) Imagining the thinking machine: Technological myths and the rise of artificial intelligence. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, no. 26 (1), pp. 3-18. DOI:
10.1177/1354856517715164 [in Eng].
15. Reis J. (2020) Artificial Intelligence Research and Its Contributions to the European Union’s Political Governance: Comparative Study between Member. Social Science, no. 9(11), pp. 1-17. DOI: 10.3390/socsci9110207 [in Eng].
16. Ryan M. (2020) In AI We Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability. Science and Engineering Ethics, no. 26, pp. 2749—2767. DOI: DOI: 10.1007/s11948-020-00228-y [in Eng].
17. Shneiderman B. (2020) Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence: Reliable, Safe & Trustworthy. International Journal of Human—Computer Interaction, no. 36(6). DOI: 10.1080/10447318.2020.1741118 [in Eng].
18. Singh S. (2020) Convergence of blockchain and artificial intelligence in IoT network for the sustainable smart city. Sustainable cities and society, no. 63, p. 102364. DOI: 10.1016/j.scs.2020.102364 [in Eng].
19. Timms M. (2016) Letting Artificial Intelligence in Education Out of the Box: Educational Cobots and Smart Classrooms. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, no. 26, pp. 701—712 DOI: 10.1007/s40593-016-0095-y [in Eng].
20. Zawacki-Richter O. (2019) Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education — where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, no 16 (39). DOI: 10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0 [in Eng].