Imagination, Invention and Internet: From Aristotle to Artificial Intelligence and the ‘Post-human’ Development and Ethics

  • Qerim QerimiEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 91)


The notion that perennial questions of human welfare and future life defined or dictated by technological advances are as ancient as Aristotle’s thought might be intellectually curious, yet factually accurate and discursively valid. It is true that one of the fundamental tenets of Aristotle’s peripatetic philosophy is that the goal of life is to maximize happiness by living virtuously, fulfilling your own potential as a human, and engaging with others—family, friends and fellow citizens—in mutually beneficial activities. In his conception, purposively imagining a better, happier life is feasible since humans have inborn abilities that allow them to promote individual and collective flourishing. These include the inclinations to ask questions about the world, to deliberate about action, and to activate conscious recollection (Hall 2018). There is but one element in the life maximization equation that plays a critical role, namely imagination.


  1. Aristotle: The Politics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York (1988)Google Scholar
  2. Brownsword, R., Harel, A.: Law, liberty and technology: criminal justice in the context of smart machines. Int. J. Law Context 15, 107–125 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen, K., Sergi, B.S.: How can fintech remake Russia’s development? In: Sergi, B.S. (ed.) Exploring the Future of Russia’s Economy and Markets: Towards Sustainable Economic Development, pp. 1–11. Emerald Publishing, Bingley (2018)Google Scholar
  4. Cluskey, P.: Social media evidence a game-changer in war crimes trial. Irish Times, October 3, 2017 (2018). 1 Aug 2019
  5. Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) 2011: Case C-70/10, Scarlet Extended SA v. Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM). 30 July 2019
  6. D’Agaro, E.: Artificial intelligence used in genome analysis studies. EuroBiotech J. 2(2), 78–88 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eady, T.: Does recent progress with neural networks foretell artificial general intelligence? (2018). 31 July 2019
  8. European Commission High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence 2018: Draft: Ethics Guidelines for Trustworthy AI. 1 Aug 2019
  9. Gill, A.S.: Artificial intelligence and international security: the long view. Ethics Int. Aff. 33(2), 169–179 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Group of Governmental Experts of the High Contracting Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions and Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects 2018: Report of the 2018 Session of the Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems.$file/CCW_GGE.1_2018_3_final.pdf. 1 Aug 2019
  11. Hall, E.: Aristotle’s Way: How Ancient Wisdom Can Change Your Life. Penguin Press, New York (2018)Google Scholar
  12. Harari, Y.N.: Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. Harper, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  13. Hawking, S.: Brief Answers to the Big Questions. John Murray, London (2018)Google Scholar
  14. Human Rights Council: Resolution 32/13. A/HRC/RES/32/13, 18 July 2016Google Scholar
  15. Human Rights Council: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. U.N. HRC, 17th Sess., U.N. Doc. A/HRC/17/27, 16 May 2011Google Scholar
  16. Human Rights Watch 2017: China: Police DNA Database Threatens Privacy, 15 May 2017. 1 Aug 2019
  17. Joh, E.E.: The new surveillance discretion: automated suspicion, big data, and policing. Research Paper No. 473. UC Davis Legal Studies Research Paper Series (2015)Google Scholar
  18. Kobie, N.: The complicated truth about China’s social credit system. Wired, 21 January 2019. 1 Aug 2019
  19. Lin, P., Allhoff, F.: Arctic 2.0: how artificial intelligence can help develop a frontier. Ethics Int. Aff. 33(2), 193–205 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Livingston, S., Risse, M.: The future impact of artificial intelligence on humans and human rights. Ethics Int. Aff. 33(2), 141–158 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Popkova, E.G., Sergi, B.S.: Will industry 4.0 and other innovations impact Russia’s development? In: Sergi, B.S. (ed.) Exploring the Future of Russia’s Economy and Markets: Towards Sustainable Economic Development, pp. 51–68. Emerald Publishing, Bingley (2019)Google Scholar
  22. Qerimi, Q.: Bridge over troubled water: an emerging right to access to the internet. Int. Rev. Law 2017(1), 1–22 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Qerimi, Q.: Development in International Law: A Policy-Oriented Inquiry. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden and Boston (2012a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Qerimi, Q.: Technology and Development: Universalizing Access to and Protection of Information and Communication Technology. Int. J. Soc. Ecol. Sustain. Dev. 3(1), 1–21 (2012b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reisman, W.M., Arsanjani, M.H., Wiessner, S., Westerman, G.S.: International Law in Contemporary Perspective. Foundation Press, St. Paul (2004)Google Scholar
  26. Roff, H.M.: Artificial Intelligence: Power to the People. Ethics Int. Aff. 33(2), 127–140 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Sergi, B.S., Popkova, E.G., Bogoviz, A.V., Litvinova, T.N.: Understanding Industry 4.0: AI, the Internet of Things, and the Future of Work. Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley (2019)Google Scholar
  28. Sachs, J.D.: Some Brief Reflections on Digital Technologies and Economic Development. Ethics Int. Aff. 33(2), 159–167 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tegmark, M.: Speaking in ‘Do You Trust This Computer?’, YouTube video, 1:18:03, posted by Dr. Caleb Cheung (2018). 1 Aug 2019
  30. U.S. Supreme Court: Buckley v. Am. Constitutional Law Found. 525 U.S. 182 (1999)Google Scholar
  31. U.S. Supreme Court: McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n. 514 U.S. 334 (1995)Google Scholar
  32. U.S. Supreme Court: Talley v. California. 362 U.S. 60 (1960)Google Scholar
  33. Venice Commission: Joint Opinion on the Albania’s Draft to the legislative Initiative of the Citizens. Adopted at its 116th Plenary Session, 19–20 October 2018Google Scholar
  34. Venice Commission: Joint Opinion on the Draft Law on State Register of Voters of Ukraine. Adopted at its 71st Plenary Session, 1–2 June 2007Google Scholar
  35. Wamboye, E., Tochkov, K., Sergi, B.S.: Technology adoption and growth in sub-Saharan African Countries. Comp. Econ. Stud. 57(1), 136–167 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium
  2. 2.University of PrishtinaPristinaKosovo

Personalised recommendations