Yapay Zeka ve Felsefi Düşünceler: SWOT Analizi ile Derinlemesine İnceleme

Year 2024, , 138 - 153, 15.12.2024

Şeyma Bozkurt Uzan

https://doi.org/10.58634/felsefedunyasi.1562485

Abstract

Yapay zeka (YZ), teknolojik dünyada dönüştürücü bir güç haline gelmiş, insan hayatının çeşitli yönlerini yeniden şekillendirmiş ve derin felsefi sorular ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bu makale, kapsamlı bir literatür taraması ve 20 önemli makalenin SWOT analizi yoluyla YZ ve felsefe arasındaki kesişimi araştırmaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı, YZ’nin etik, bilinç, zeka ve insan doğası hakkındaki felsefi tartışmaları nasıl etkilediğini anlamaktır. Bulgular, mevcut literatürle ilişkili temel güçlü yönleri, zayıf yönleri, fırsatları ve tehditleri ortaya koymaktadır. Önemli güçlü yönler arasında, yüksek atıf alan çalışmaların temel etkisi ve ele alınan konuların çeşitliliği yer almaktadır. Ancak bazı makaleler, güncelliğini yitirmiş teoriler veya sınırlı pratik entegrasyon nedeniyle sınırlamalarla karşı karşıyadır. Çalışma, YZ geliştirmede etik çerçevelerin gerekliliğini vurgulamakta ve özellikle sosyal adalet ve eşitlik konularında gelecekteki araştırma alanlarını öne çıkarmaktadır. Bu makale, mevcut bilgileri sentezleyerek YZ’nin etik, sosyal ve felsefi boyutlarına dair yeni içgörüler sunmakta ve gelecekteki araştırma ve politika geliştirmeleri için sağlam bir temel sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

Yapay zeka, Felsefe, Etik, SWOT analizi, Literatür taraması

From Past to Present: Philosophical Reflections on AI with a SWOT Approach

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) has become a transformative force in the technological world, reshaping various aspects of human life and raising profound philosophical questions. This article explores the intersection of AI and philosophy by conducting a comprehensive literature review and SWOT analysis of 20 significant articles. The study aims to understand how AI influences philosophical debates on ethics, consciousness, intelligence, and human nature. The findings reveal key strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with the current literature. Notable strengths include the foundational impact of highly cited works and the diverse range of topics covered. However, some articles face limitations due to outdated theories or limited practical integration. The study underscores the need for ethical frameworks in AI development and highlights areas for future research, particularly in addressing social justice and equity. By synthesizing existing knowledge, this paper offers new insights into the ethical, social, and philosophical dimensions of AI, providing a solid foundation for future research and policy development.

Keywords

Artificial intelligence, Philosophy, Ethics, SWOT analysis, Literature Review

References

• Armstrong, D. M. (1970). The nature of mind. İçinde C. V. Borst (Ed.), The Mind/Brain Identity Theory (ss. 56-66). Macmillan.
• Bloomfield, B. P. (Ed.). (2018). The question of artificial intelligence: Philosophical and sociological perspectives. Routledge.
• Bostrom, N., & Yudkowsky, E. (2018). The ethics of artificial intelligence. İçinde Artificial intelligence safety and security (ss. 57-69). Chapman and Hall/CRC.
• Dietrich, E. (2002). Philosophy of artificial intelligence. The Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science, 203-208. Dreyfus, H. L. (1992). What computers still can’t do: A critique of artificial reason. MIT Press.
• Hernández-Orallo, J. (2017). The measure of all minds: Evaluating natural and artificial intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
• Kuipers, B. (2018). How can we trust a robot? Communications of the ACM, 61(3), 86-95.
• Kurzweil, R. (2005). The singularity is near. İçinde Ethics and emerging technologies (ss. 393-406). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
• Lucas, J. R. (1961). Minds, machines and Gödel. Philosophy, 36(137), 112-127.
• Marvin, G., Tamale, M., Kanagwa, B., & Jjingo, D. (2023). Philosophical review of artificial intelligence for Society 5.0. İçinde International Conference on Paradigms of Communication, Computing and Data Analytics (ss. 1-15). Springer Nature Singapore.
• McDermott, D. (2007). Artificial intelligence and consciousness. İçinde The Cambridge handbook of consciousness (ss. 117-150). Cambridge University Press.
• Minsky, M. (2007). The emotion machine: Commonsense thinking, artificial intelligence, and the future of the human mind. Simon and Schuster.
• Mittelstadt, B. D., Allo, P., Taddeo, M., Wachter, S., & Floridi, L. (2016). The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716679679
• Müller, V. C. (2020). Ethics of artificial intelligence and robotics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
• Nagel, T. (1980). What is it like to be a bat? İçinde The language and thought series (ss. 159-168). Harvard University Press.
• Quttainah, M., Mishra, V., Madakam, S., Lurie, Y., & Mark, S. (2024). Cost, usability, credibility, fairness, accountability, transparency, and explainability framework for safe and effective large language models in medical education: Narrative review and qualitative study. JMIR AI, 3(1), e51834.
• Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2016). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson.
• Schwab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Currency.
• Searle, J. R. (1982). The Chinese room revisited. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 5(2), 345-348. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00012425
• Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(3), 417-424.
• Smith, G. (2018). The AI delusion. Oxford University Press.
• Turing, A. M. (1950). Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59, 433–460.
• Wallach, W., & Allen, C. (2008). Moral machines: Teaching robots right from wrong. Oxford University Press.
• Winfield, A. F., Michael, K., Pitt, J., & Evers, V. (2019). Machine ethics: The design and governance of ethical AI and autonomous systems [scanning the issue]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 107(3), 509-517.
• Yudkowsky, E. (2016). The AI alignment problem: Why it is hard, and where to start. Symbolic Systems Distinguished Speaker, 4, 1.