Advertisement

Abstract

This text is based on an invited address presented at IFIP 8.2 ‘Living with Monsters’ in San Francisco, CA, 11 December 2018. Taking the 200th anniversary of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley’s Frankenstein as a starting place, I explore questions of autonomy and control with respect to human/technology relations. I consider the ambivalence of these agencies, and recent initiatives in science and technology studies and related fields to reconceptualize the problem as matters of relation and care. While embracing this turn, I reflect as well upon the ambivalences of relation and care, and the need to address the resilient politics of alterity in our figurations (and celebrations) of the monstrous.

Keywords

Technological autonomy Control Care 

References

  1. 1.
    Llach, D.C.: Builders of the Vision: Software and the Imagination of Design. Routledge, New York and Oxford (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cohen, J.J.: The promise of monsters. In: Mittman, A.S., Dendle, P. (eds.) The Ashgate Research Companion to Monsters and the Monstrous, pp. 449–464, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guston, D., Finn, E., Robert, J.S. (eds.): Frankenstein: Annotated for Scientists, Engineers, and Creators of All Kinds. MIT Press, Cambridge and London (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hersch, S.: The killing of Osama Bin Laden. In: London Review of Books, 21 May 2015Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Heyns, C.: Report of the special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (2013). http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session23/A-HRC-23-47_en.pdf
  6. 6.
    Puig de la Bellacasa, M.: Matters of Care: Speculative Ethics in More Than Human Worlds. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis and London (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rhee, J.: The Robotic Imaginary: The Human and the Price of Dehumanized Labor. Minnesota University Press, Minneapolis and London (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shelley, M.W.: Frankenstein, or The Modern Prometheus. Anonymous, London (1818)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simon, H.: The Sciences of the Artificial. MIT Press, Cambridge (1969)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Souza, P.: Situation Room, photo taken by White House photographer Pete Souza at 4:06 pm on 1 May 2011. Wikimedia (2011). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situation_Room_(photograph). Accessed 22 Sept 2018
  11. 11.
    Suchman, L.: Located Accountabilities in Technology Production. Scand. J. Inf. Syst. 14(2), 91–105 (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Suchman, L.: Situational awareness and adherence to the principle of distinction as a necessary condition for lawful autonomy. In: Geiss, R., Lahmann, H. (eds.) Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems: Technology, Definition, Ethics, Law & Security, pp. 273–283. Federal Foreign Office, Division Conventional Arms Control, Berlin (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Suchman, L., Asaro, P., Irani, L.: Google’s march to the business of war must be stopped. The Guardian, 16 May 2018. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/16/google-business-war-project-maven. Accessed 22 Sept 2018
  14. 14.
    Suchman, L., Weber, J.: Human-machine autonomies. In: Bhuta, N., Beck, S., Geis, R., Liu, H.-Y., Kreis, C. (eds.) Autonomous Weapons Systems, pp. 75–102. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    UN News: At UN, robot Sophia joins meeting on artificial intelligence and sustainable development. https://news.un.org/en/story/2017/10/568292-un-robot-sophia-joins-meeting-artificial-intelligence-and-sustainable. Accessed 11 Oct 2017
  16. 16.
    Winner, L.: Autonomous Technology: Technics-out-of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought. MIT Press, Cambridge (1977)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Lancaster UniversityBailriggUK

Personalised recommendations