中文    English

Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture ›› 2024, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (3): 59-71.doi: 10.13998/j.cnki.issn1002-1248.24-0194

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Machine Functionalism and the Digital-Intelligence Divide: Evolutionary Pathways, Generative Logic and Regulatory Strategies

ZHOU Xin   

  1. School of Public Administration, Hohai University, Nanjing 211100
  • Received:2024-02-04 Online:2024-03-05 Published:2024-06-24

Abstract: [Purpose/Significance] This study aims to critically analyze the social philosophical roots of the digital intelligence divide from the perspective of machine functionalism. By uncovering the theoretical origins and generation pathways of the digital intelligence divide, countermeasures can be proposed. The research contributes to understanding the divide's impact on society and provides insights for promoting inclusive development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology. The study fills a gap in the literature by linking machine functionalism to the digital intelligence divide and offers a novel perspective on addressing the unequal use of AI technology. The findings have significant implications for policymakers, technology developers, and researchers in the fields of AI ethics, digital inequality, and social philosophy. [Method/Process] Using the theoretical lens of machine functionalism, this study examines the evolutionary pathways, generation mechanisms, and multiple risks of the digital intelligence divide. It draws on relevant theories, such as the extended mind thesis and the theory of technological determinism, to analyze how machine functionalism influences the design and application of AI technology. The study also draws on empirical evidence from case studies and surveys to illustrate the manifestation of the digital intelligence divide in different contexts. By synthesizing theoretical and empirical insights, the research proposes interventions that address the divide at different levels, from the philosophical underpinnings to the practical implementation of AI technology. [Results/Conclusions] The study shows that machine functionalism, which applies Turing machine principles to explain the mind and views the mind as a physically realized Turing machine. It has become the social philosophical foundation of AI technology. While breaking with the traditional biological essentialist view of the mind, machine functionalism inadvertently creates inequitable uses of AI through three main pathways: the mechanization of the mind, designer bias and algorithmic preference, and technological specialization and barriers to entry. This creates the digital intelligence divide and risks such as the evolution of information access inequality into social inequality and the weakening of information cocoons and public dialogue. The study argues that interventions are needed to mitigate these risks and promote a more equitable distribution of the benefits of AI technology. To bridge the digital intelligence divide, the study suggests a multi-pronged approach. First, future efforts should focus on promoting positive interaction between machines and humans through value-sensitive design, which incorporates ethical considerations into the development and deployment of AI systems. Second, developing ethical algorithms that eliminate designer bias and algorithmic preference is critical to ensuring fair and unbiased AI decision-making. Third, improving the digital intelligence skills of individuals and communities can help break down barriers to entry caused by technological specialization and enable more people to benefit from AI technology. Together, these policies can help break down the barriers of unequal technology use under machine functionalism. The study concludes by emphasizing the importance of a collaborative effort among policymakers, technology developers, researchers, and the public in addressing the digital intelligence divide. It calls for further research on the social implications of machine functionalism and the development of inclusive AI governance frameworks. The findings of this study serve as a foundation for future work to mitigate the risks of the digital intelligence divide and promote the responsible and equitable development of AI technology.

Key words: machine functionalism, digital intelligence gap, designer bias, algorithmic preference, information inequality, information behavior

CLC Number: 

  • G250.7
[1] 江晖. 人类与ChatGPT的共存共生: 从“数字鸿沟”到“数智鸿沟”——以日本“技能重塑”计划为例[J]. 阅江学刊, 2023, 15(3): 74-83, 174.
JIANG H.Coexistence of human being and ChatGPT taking "reskilling" program in Japan as an example: From "digital divide" to "digital intelligence divide"[J]. Yuejiang academic journal, 2023, 15(3): 74-83, 174.
[2] CISMARU D M, GAZZOLA P, CIOCHINA R S, et al.The rise of digital intelligence: Challenges for public relations education and practices[J]. Kybernetes, 2018, 47(10): 1924-1940.
[3] KOUSALYA G, BALAKRISHNAN P, PETHURU RAJ C.Stepping into the digital intelligence era[M]//Automated Workflow Schedul-ing in Self-Adaptive Clouds. Cham: Springer, 2017: 1-22.
[4] SARNOK K, THAILAN T V U, WANNAPIROON P, et al. DTL-eco system by digital storytelling to develop knowledge and digital intel-ligence for teacher profession students[J]. International journal of information and education technology, 2020, 10(12): 865-872.
[5] 孙榕, 李白杨. 生成式人工智能(GAI)背景下的新型数字鸿沟识别框架研究[J/OL]. 图书情报知识,2024: 1-12. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/42.1085.G2.20240321.1548.002.html.
SUN R, LI B Y.A framework for identifying the new digital divide within the context of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)[J]. Document, information & knowledge, 2024A framework for identifying the new digital divide within the context of generative artificial intelligence (GAI)[J]. Document, information & knowledge, 2024: 1-12. http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/42.1085.G2.20240321.1548.002.html.
[6] 王娟, 汤书昆, 秦庆. 道德责任鸿沟的消解——智能媒体算法责任研究[J]. 全球传媒学刊, 2023, 10(5): 127-140.
WANG J, TANG S K, QIN Q.The elimination of the moral responsibility gap: Research on the moral responsibility of algorithmic media[J]. Global journal of media studies, 2023, 10(5): 127-140.
[7] 杨峰. 生成式人工智能的智能鸿沟生成[J]. 图书馆建设, 2023(4): 22-24.
YANG F.Intelligent divide generation of artificial intelligence generated content[J]. Library development, 2023(4): 22-24.
[8] 梅傲. 积极伦理观下算法歧视治理模式的革新[J]. 政治与法律, 2024(2): 113-126.
MEI A.Renovation of mode of governing algorithmic discrimination from the perspective of positive view on ethics[J]. Political science and law, 2024(2): 113-126.
[9] 蓝江. 智能算法下人的数字异化与生存变革[J]. 人民论坛, 2021(S1): 20-22.
LAN J.Human digital alienation and survival change in intelligent algorithm[J]. People's tribune, 2021(S1): 20-22.
[10] 方兴东, 钟祥铭, 严峰. 论数字传播学的崛起——传播学新范式的演进历程、知识体系和路径选择[J]. 新闻与写作, 2020(11): 37-51.
FANG X D, ZHONG X M, YAN F.On the rise of digital communication - Evolution, knowledge system and path selection of the new paradigm of communication[J]. News and writing, 2020(11): 37-51.
[11] 贾诗威, 闫慧. 算法偏见概念、哲理基础与后果的系统回顾[J]. 中国图书馆学报, 2022, 48(6): 57-76.
JIA S W, YAN H.A systematic review of concept, philosophy foundation and impacts of algorithmic bias[J]. Journal of library science in China, 2022, 48(6): 57-76.
[12] THIEDE M.Information and access to health care: Is there a role for trust?[J]. Social science & medicine, 2005, 61(7): 1452-1462.
[13] TEWATHIA N, KAMATH A, ILAVARASAN P V.Social inequalities, fundamental inequities, and recurring of the digital divide: Insights from India[J]. Technology in society, 2020, 61: 101251.
[14] LUCENDO-MONEDERO A L, RUIZ-RODRIGUEZ F, GONZALEZ-RELANO R. Measuring the digital divide at regional level. A spatial analysis of the inequalities in digital development of households and individuals in Europe[J]. Telematics and informatics, 2019, 41: 197-217.
[15] GRAN A B, BOOTH P, BUCHER T.To be or not to be algorithm aware: A question of a new digital divide?[J]. Information, communication & society, 2021, 24(12): 1779-1796.
[16] 拉里·怀特哈尔·普特南. 李真, 编. 普特南文选[M]. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社, 2009.
PUTNAM H.Selected writings of hilary putnam[M]. Beijing: Social Sciences Literature Publishing House, 2009.
[17] RINGLE M, SLOMAN A.The computer revolution in philosophy: Philosophy, science, and models of mind[J]. Noûs, 1982, 16(1): 170.
[18] WALL E, BLAHA L M, PAUL C L, et al.Four perspectives on hu-man bias in visual analytics[M]//ELLIS G. Cognitive Biases in Visu-alizations. Cham: Springer, 2018: 29-42.
[19] SIMON J, WONG P H, RIEDER G.Algorithmic bias and the value sensitive design approach[J]. Internet policy review, 2020, 9(4): 33-41.
[20] KORDZADEH N, GHASEMAGHAEI M.Algorithmic bias: Review, synthesis, and future research directions[J]. European journal of information systems, 2022, 31(3): 388-409.
[21] ORPHANOU K, OTTERBACHER J, KLEANTHOUS S, et al.Mitigating bias in algorithmic systems - A fish-eye view[J]. ACM computing surveys, 2023, 55(5): 1-37.
[22] BIGMAN Y E, WILSON D, ARNESTAD M N, et al.Algorithmic discrimination causes less moral outrage than human discrimination[J]. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 2023, 152(1): 4-27.
[23] CANGUILHEM G.Machine and organism[M]//The Ethics of Biote-chnology. London: Routledge, 2021: 31-76.
[24] ZHANG D, PEE L G, CUI L L.Artificial intelligence in E-commerce fulfillment: A case study of resource orchestration at Alibaba's Smart Warehouse[J]. International journal of information management, 2021, 57: 102304.
[25] IZADI A, MOHAMMADI M, NASEKHIAN S, et al.Structural func-tionalism, social sustainability and the historic environment: A role for theory in urban regeneration[J]. The historic environment: Policy & practice, 2020, 11(2/3): 158-180.
[26] ROBINSON L, COTTEN S R, ONO H, et al.Digital inequalities and why they matter[J]. Information, communication & society, 2015, 18(5): 569-582.
[27] WARREN-SMITH G.New models of the inner self: Identity in the digital age[J]. Journal of writing in creative practice, 2020, 13(1): 131-146.
[28] 杨芳芳, 宋雪雁, 张伟民. 国内信息茧房研究热点与演进趋势: 兼论静态和动态双重视角[J]. 情报科学, 2024(3): 1-13.
YANG F F, SONG X Y, ZHANG W M.Research hotspots and evolution trends of domestic information cocoons: A dual perspective of static and dynamic perspectives[J]. Information science, 2024(3): 1-13.
[29] LEE M H.The medium is the message[J]. Communication in mis-sion: Global opportunities and challenges, 2022, 30: 163.
[30] SHIN D.How do users interact with algorithm recommender systems? The interaction of users, algorithms, and performance[J]. Computers in human behavior, 2020, 109: 106344.
[31] NATALE S.Deceitful media: Artificial intelligence and social life after the turing test[M]. the USA: Oxford University Press, 2021.
[32] PIERRE B.The forms of capütal, in handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education[M]. New York: Greenwood Press 1986: 241-258.
[33] COLEMAN F.A human algorithm: How artificial intelligence is redefining who we are[M]. California: Catapult, 2020.
[34] WINATA S, KUSNAWAN A, LIMAJATINI L, et al.Ethical decision making based on the literature review of ford & Richardson 1962- 1993[J]. Primanomics: jurnal ekonomi & bisnis, 2020, 18(1): 1.
[35] SCHON D A.The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action[M]. New York: Basic Books, 1983.
[1] LIU Yang, LYU Shuyue, LI Ruojun. Concept, Task, and Application of Social Robots in Information Behavior Research [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2024, 36(3): 4-20.
[2] SHI Yanqing, LI Lu, SHI Qin. Impact of User Heterogeneity on Knowledge Collaboration Effectiveness from a Network Structure Perspective [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2024, 36(3): 72-82.
[3] WANG Yueying. Exploring the Causes of Low Health Information Literacy Among Rural Middle-Aged and Elderly Adults and its Improvement Strategies [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2024, 36(2): 81-93.
[4] WANG Weizheng, QIAO Hong, LI Xiaojun, WANG Jingjing. User Willingness to Use Generative Artificial Intelligence Based on AIDUA Framework [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2024, 36(2): 36-50.
[5] XIE Yanjie. Review of Public Library Services to the Elderly in China [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2023, 35(7): 18-26.
[6] LI Jing. Causes of Intergenerational Conflict Heath Information Behavior and Its Mechanism in Social Control in the Context of Public Health Emergencies [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2023, 35(5): 74-88.
[7] XIAO Yun, XU Huanhuan, XIAO Yayuan, ZHAO Youlin, PANG Hangyuan. User Preference Mining in Digital Community Based on CLV Preference Mining Model [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2023, 35(2): 45-60.
[8] JIANG Zhihui, LI Xuan, CAO Gaohui. Causes and Influence Paths of Digital Stress among Social Media Users [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2023, 35(11): 64-76.
[9] GUO Pengrui, WEN Tingxiao. Research of the Impact of LLMs on Information Retrieval Systems and Users' Information Retrieval Behavior [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2023, 35(11): 13-22.
[10] KE Tingjuan, ZENG Zhen. Problems and Influencing Factors of Rural Information Dissemination under Different Themes [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2022, 34(7): 14-26.
[11] XING Fei, LIU Caihua, CHAI Xuefei, PENG Guochao. Influencing Factors of Elderly Users' Health Information Adoption Behavior Based on Social Platforms: Taking WeChat as an Example [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2022, 34(7): 53-64.
[12] HUANG Taihua, ZHANG Tao, WANG Lei. Construction of College Students' "Consumption-Academic-Social" Profiles from the Perspective of Multi-source Data Fusion [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2022, 34(7): 76-87.
[13] FU Lihong, HAN Lu. The Influencing Mechanism of Postgraduates' Trust in Academic Information Consumption and Intensification Strategy [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2022, 34(6): 72-82.
[14] ZHANG Yu, HUO Mingkui. An Investigation into Information Needs of Rural Entrepreneurial Youth in the Context of Rural Revitalization: Based on the Survey in Heilongjiang, Jilin and Liaoning Provinces [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2022, 34(3): 51-60.
[15] LI Xuguang, XIAO Siqi, LI Shanshan, ZHANG Heng. Research on User Profiles of Xiaomi Community Based on Knowledge Behavior [J]. Journal of Library and Information Science in Agriculture, 2021, 33(8): 4-12.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!