Yapay Zekâ Sosyolojisi Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme

Abstract

Günümüz dünyasında en çok tartışılan teknolojik yeniliklerden biri olan yapay zekâ, etkinliğini hayatın her alanında her geçen gün biraz daha arttırmaktadır. Yapılan çalışmalar ve istatistikler ortaya koymaktadır ki yapay zekânın toplumsal hayata olan etkisi mütemadiyen artmakta ve toplumsal yaşamı farklı biçimlerde etkilemektedir. Dolayısıyla yapay zekâ yazılım ve bilgisayar bilimlerinin olduğu kadar sosyal bilimlerin de ilgi alanına girmektedir. Yapay zekâyı konu edinen sosyolojik çalışmalar hem nitelik hem nicelik açısından artış göstermektedir. Sosyoloji içerisinde yapay zekâ üzerine çalışmalarda iki temel yaklaşım olduğu görülmektedir. Birinci gruptaki çalışmalar yoğunlukla yapay zekâyı toplumsal etkileri bağlamında sermaye ve siyasal iktidarların toplumsal kontrolü sürdürmelerinin bir aracı, toplumsal eşitsizlikleri yeniden üreten bir olgu ve onu üretenlerin kültürel yanlılıklarını taşıyan kültürel bir fenomen olarak ele alınmaktadır. İkinci gruptaki çalışmalar ise, genelde teknolojiyi özelde ise yapay zekâyı toplumsallığın üretiminde “toplumsal aktör” olarak konumlandıran çalışmalardır. Bu çalışmanın amacı yapay zekânın sosyoloji literatüründe ele alınış biçimlerini eleştirel bir perspektiften ele almak ve yapay zekâ sosyolojisini tartışmaya açmaktır.

Keywords

• yapay zeka
• sosyoloji
• teknoloji

An Evaluation on the Sociology of Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

Artificial intelligence, which is one of the most discussed technological innovations in today's world, increases its effectiveness in every field of life day by day. Studies and statistics reveal that the impact of artificial intelligence on social life is constantly increasing and it affects social life in different ways. Therefore, artificial intelligence is as much a concern of software and computer sciences as of social sciences. Sociological studies on artificial intelligence are increasing both in terms of quality and quantity. There are two main approaches in studies on artificial intelligence in sociology. The studies in the first group focus mainly on artificial intelligence in the context of its social effects, as a tool for capital and political power to maintain social control, as a phenomenon that reproduces social inequalities, and as a cultural phenomenon that carries the cultural biases of those who produce it. The studies in the second group are those that position technology in general and artificial intelligence in particular as a “social actor” in the production of sociality. The aim of this study is to critically examine the ways in which artificial intelligence is handled in the sociological literature and to discuss the sociology of artificial intelligence.

Keywords

• artificial intelligence
• sociology
• technology

References

1. Asaro, P. M. (2012). A body to kick, but still no soul to damn: Legal perspectives on robotics. P. Lin, K. Abney, G. A. Bekey (Ed), Robot ethics: The ethical and social implication of robotics (169-186 ss.). Massachusetts:MIT Press.
2. Barocas, S., Hood, S. & Ziewitz, M. (2013). Governing algorithms: A provocation piece.
3. Beck, U. (2011). Risk toplumu: Başka bir modernliğe doğru (K. Özdoğan, B. Doğan, Çev.), İstanbul:İthaki Yayınları.
4. Beer, D. (2017). The social power of algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 1–13.
5. Berman, B. (1992). Artificial intelligence and the ideology of capitalist reconstruction. AI & Society, 6(2), 103–114.
6. Bloomfield, B. P. (1987). The culture of artificial intelligence. B. P. Bloomfield (Ed.), The question of artificial intelligence: Philosophical and sociological perspectives (59–105 ss.). New York:Croom Helm.
7. Broussard, M. (2018). Artificial unintelligence: How computers misunderstand the world. Massachusetts:The MIT Press. Buchanan, B. G. (2005). A (very) brief history of artificial intelligence. AI Magazine, 26(4). 53-60.
8. Crevier, D. (1993). AI: The tumultuous search for artificial intelligence. New York: BasicBooks.

9. Eynon, R., & Young, E. (2021). Methodology, legend, and rhetoric: The constructions of AI by academia, industry, and policy groups for lifelong learning. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 46(1), 166–191.
10. Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York:Vintage Books.
11. Fleck, J. (1987). Development and establishment of artificial intelligence. B. P. Bloomfield (Ed.), The question of artificial intelligence: Philosophical and sociological perspectives (106–164 ss.). New York:Croom Helm.
12. Ford, M. Robotların yükselişi: Yapay zekâ ve işsiz bir gelecek tehlikesi (C. Duran, Çev.). İstanbul:Kronik Kitap.
13. Forsythe, D. E. (1993). The construction of work in artificial intelligence. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18(4), 460–479.
14. Foucault, M. (2012). İktidarın gözü: Seçme yazılar 4 (I. Ergüden, Çev.). İstanbul:Ayrıntı Yayınları.
15. Grand View Research. (2021). Artificial intelligence market size, share & trends Analysis report by solution, by technology, by end use, by region, and segment forecasts, 2021-2028. Erişim adresi: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/artificial-intelligence-ai-market
16. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York:Garland Publishing.
17. Ihde, D. (1979). Techincs and praxis. Boston:D. Reidel Publishing.
18. Joyce, K., Smith-Doerr, L., Alegria, S., Bell, S., Cruz, T., Hoffman, S. G., Noble, S. U., & Shestakofsky, B. (2021). toward a sociology of artificial intelligence: A call for research on inequalities and structural change. Socius, 7. 1-11.
19. Katz, Y. (2020). Artificial whiteness: Politics and ideology in artificial intelligence. New York:Columbia University Press.
20. Latour, B. (2010). The pasteurization of france. Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
21. Latour, B. (2020). Biz hiç modern olmadık. (İ. Uysal, Çev.). İstanbul:Norgunk Yayıncılık.
22. Levy, D. (2012). The ethics of robot prostitutes. P. Lin, K. Abney, G. A. Bekey (Ed), Robot ethics: The ethical and social implication of robotics (223-232 ss.). Massachusetts:MIT Press.
23. Liu, Z. (2021). Sociological perspectives on artificial intelligence: A typological reading. Sociology Compass, 15(1).
24. Lokhorst, G.A. & van den Hoven, J. (2012). Responsibility for military robots. P. Lin, K. Abney, G. A. Bekey (Ed), Robot ethics: The ethical and social implication of robotics (145-156 ss.). Massachusetts:MIT Press.
25. Marx, K. (2019): Kapital: Ekonomi politiğin eleştirisi, I. cilt. (M. Selik, N. Satlıgan, Çev.). İstanbul:Yordam Kitap.
26. McCorduck, P. (2004). Machines who think: A personal inquiry into the history and prospects of artificial intelligence. Massachusetts:A. K. Peters Publishing.
27. McKinsey & Company. (2020). İşimizin geleceği: Dijital çağda Türkiye’nin yetenek dönüşümü. Erişim adresi: https://www.mckinsey.com/tr/~/media/mckinsey/locations/europe%20and%20middle%20east/turkey/our%20insights/future%20of%20work%20turkey/isimizin-gelecegi-mckinsey-turkiye-raporu_ocak-2020.pdf
28. Microsoft. (2018). Artificial intelligence in Middle East and Africa. Erişim adresi: https://info.microsoft.com/rs/157-GQE-382/images/report-SRGCM1065.pdf
29. Mlynar, J., Alavi, H. S., Verma, H., Cantoni, L. (2018). Towards a sociological conception of artificial intelligence. Iklé M., Franz A., Rzepka R., Goertzel B. (Ed.) Artificial General Intelligence. AGI 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (130-139 ss).
30. Mühlhoff, R. (2020). Human‐aided artificial intelligence: Or, how to run large computations in human brains? Toward a media sociology of machine learning. New Media & Society, 22(10), 1868–1884.
31. Newquist, H.P. (1994). The brain makers: Genius, ego, and greed in the quest for machines that think, New York:Macmillan.
32. Obermeyer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019). Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science, 366(6464), 447–453.
33. Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.
34. Rhee, J. (2018). The robotic imaginary: The human and the price of dehumanized labor. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
35. Šabanović, S. (2014). Inventing Japan's ‘robotics culture': The repeated assembly of science, technology, and culture in social robotics. Social Studies of Science, 44(3), 342–367.
36. Schwartz, R. D. (1989). Artificial intelligence as a sociological phenomenon. The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 14(2). 179-202.
37. Sharkey, N. (2012). Killing made easy. P. Lin, K. Abney, G. A. Bekey (Ed). Robot ethics: The ethical and social implication of robotics (111-128 ss.). Massachusetts:MIT Press.
38. Stanford University. (2016). One hundred year study on artificial intelligence. Erişim adresi: https://ai100.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj9861/f/ai100report10032016fnl_singles.pdf
39. Turkle, S. (1984). The second self: Computers and the human spirit. New York: Simon and Schuster.
40. van der Linden, H. (2015). Drone warfare and just war theory. M. Cohn (Ed.), Drones and targeted Killing: Legal, moral and geopolitical issues (216-260 ss.). Massachusetts:Olive Branch Press.
41. Verbeek, P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency and design. Pennsylvania:Pennsylvania University Press.
42. Wolfe, A. (1991). Mind, self, society, and computer: Artificial intelligence and the sociology of mind. American Journal of Sociology, 96(5).
43. Woolgar, S. (1985). Why not a sociology of machines? The case of sociology and artificial intelligence. Sociology, 19(4). 557-572.