The rapid advancement of emotional AI has provoked debates about its potential to replace human caregiving,particularly for the elderly and those with chronic illnesses within the context of aging populations,notably ...The rapid advancement of emotional AI has provoked debates about its potential to replace human caregiving,particularly for the elderly and those with chronic illnesses within the context of aging populations,notably in China.The purpose of this article is to refute the possibility of emotional caring AI replacing human care from an intercultural philosophical perspective.Based on Searle’s Chinese Room argument and phenomenology,it is understood that emotional AI can only simulate emotional interactions at best;it cannot fully replicate human relationships,particularly due to its absence of authentic emotions and virtuous character,as well as its inability to foster affective connective resonance with others from a Confucian perspective.While robots taking care of the elderly physically and emotionally are worth looking forward to,such development may reduce the sense of responsibility of family members to care for the elderly,which is considered an expression of filial piety in Confucian familism.Krueger and Roberts’fictionalist human-AI interactions and Lamola’s robotics sociality shows that interacting with really humanlike robots affects our consciousness and our relationship to the world and could easily lead to a kind of anthropomorphism that causes humans to treat AI as real persons imbued with meanings.However,anthropomorphism may make humans easier to manipulate and cause trouble in real human relationships.Buber’s phenomenology suggests that such relationships are merely“I-It disguised as I-Thou relationships.”Thus,AI-human relationships in health care remain incomparable to human–human connections,and we should use AI technology in health care with caution.In addition,with the reflection of AI-human relationships,ethical guidelines and public education on AI ethics are called for.展开更多
意大利建筑师詹卡洛·德·卡洛(Giancarlo DeCarlo,1919-2005)在意大利小镇乌尔比诺(Urbino)的作品已被评论家与建筑史学者视为现代建筑如何根植于地方的经典代表,尤其是在内陆地区。然而,仅仅强调德·卡洛与环境的关系,并...意大利建筑师詹卡洛·德·卡洛(Giancarlo DeCarlo,1919-2005)在意大利小镇乌尔比诺(Urbino)的作品已被评论家与建筑史学者视为现代建筑如何根植于地方的经典代表,尤其是在内陆地区。然而,仅仅强调德·卡洛与环境的关系,并不足以揭示其工作的成果与过程。研究提出,理解德·卡洛在乌尔比诺的介入,可通过另一种更具体、更具个人性的视角--即源于两位人物德·卡洛本人与文艺复兴时期的建筑师弗朗切斯科·迪·乔尔乔·马尔蒂尼(Francesco di Giorgio Martini,1439-1501)之间一种看似悖论的关系。在这一点上,我们建议将德·卡洛的方法界定为“对话式”(dialogical)--借用马丁·布伯(Martin Buber)“对话存在”的概念,即一种将“地方”理解为主体而非客体的设计方式。研究聚焦于德·卡洛的三个项目,并将其视为与弗朗切斯科·迪·乔尔乔对话的不同方式:一是修复位于城墙棱堡内部的螺旋坡道(1971-1975);二是在18世纪修道院原址上设计教育学院(Magistero)(1968-1976);三是历经多次改造的前公爵马厩--丰饶园(Orto dell’Abbondanza)(1969-1970、1979、1990、1993-1994、1994-2002、2003-2005)。在深入解读这些项目之前,将回溯弗朗切斯科·迪·乔尔乔与德·卡洛在这座意大利丘陵小城的工作轨迹,并更广泛地探讨两位建筑师在事实与认知层面的相似性,主要引用德·卡洛本人的话语。展开更多
基金supported by a grant[SSHD-2023–299(I)]from the College of Professional and Continuing Education,an affiliate of The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.
文摘The rapid advancement of emotional AI has provoked debates about its potential to replace human caregiving,particularly for the elderly and those with chronic illnesses within the context of aging populations,notably in China.The purpose of this article is to refute the possibility of emotional caring AI replacing human care from an intercultural philosophical perspective.Based on Searle’s Chinese Room argument and phenomenology,it is understood that emotional AI can only simulate emotional interactions at best;it cannot fully replicate human relationships,particularly due to its absence of authentic emotions and virtuous character,as well as its inability to foster affective connective resonance with others from a Confucian perspective.While robots taking care of the elderly physically and emotionally are worth looking forward to,such development may reduce the sense of responsibility of family members to care for the elderly,which is considered an expression of filial piety in Confucian familism.Krueger and Roberts’fictionalist human-AI interactions and Lamola’s robotics sociality shows that interacting with really humanlike robots affects our consciousness and our relationship to the world and could easily lead to a kind of anthropomorphism that causes humans to treat AI as real persons imbued with meanings.However,anthropomorphism may make humans easier to manipulate and cause trouble in real human relationships.Buber’s phenomenology suggests that such relationships are merely“I-It disguised as I-Thou relationships.”Thus,AI-human relationships in health care remain incomparable to human–human connections,and we should use AI technology in health care with caution.In addition,with the reflection of AI-human relationships,ethical guidelines and public education on AI ethics are called for.
文摘意大利建筑师詹卡洛·德·卡洛(Giancarlo DeCarlo,1919-2005)在意大利小镇乌尔比诺(Urbino)的作品已被评论家与建筑史学者视为现代建筑如何根植于地方的经典代表,尤其是在内陆地区。然而,仅仅强调德·卡洛与环境的关系,并不足以揭示其工作的成果与过程。研究提出,理解德·卡洛在乌尔比诺的介入,可通过另一种更具体、更具个人性的视角--即源于两位人物德·卡洛本人与文艺复兴时期的建筑师弗朗切斯科·迪·乔尔乔·马尔蒂尼(Francesco di Giorgio Martini,1439-1501)之间一种看似悖论的关系。在这一点上,我们建议将德·卡洛的方法界定为“对话式”(dialogical)--借用马丁·布伯(Martin Buber)“对话存在”的概念,即一种将“地方”理解为主体而非客体的设计方式。研究聚焦于德·卡洛的三个项目,并将其视为与弗朗切斯科·迪·乔尔乔对话的不同方式:一是修复位于城墙棱堡内部的螺旋坡道(1971-1975);二是在18世纪修道院原址上设计教育学院(Magistero)(1968-1976);三是历经多次改造的前公爵马厩--丰饶园(Orto dell’Abbondanza)(1969-1970、1979、1990、1993-1994、1994-2002、2003-2005)。在深入解读这些项目之前,将回溯弗朗切斯科·迪·乔尔乔与德·卡洛在这座意大利丘陵小城的工作轨迹,并更广泛地探讨两位建筑师在事实与认知层面的相似性,主要引用德·卡洛本人的话语。
