The TU Delft is looking for a PhD candidate to work on the project āTowards an intercultural ethics of existential risksā embedded in the ESDiT programme.
The primary goal of the project is to study existential risks as part of a broader conceptual cluster disrupted by socio-technological developments through the lens of general intercultural philosophy or a specific non-Western ethical framework. The resulting approach of āintercultural ethics of existential risksā would be operationalized to explore whether and how insights and perspectives from under-represented philosophical traditions bear upon understanding existential risks (and related concepts), and subsequently, normative and practical questions associated with why their mitigation matters, for whom, and so on.Ā
The supervisory team for this position will consist of Dr. Kritika Maheshwari (TU Delft), Dr. Gunter Bombaerts (TU Eindhoven), and Prof.Dr. Sabine Roeser (TU Delft). The position is based at the Ethics and Philosophy of Technology Section at the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management (TPM) at TU Delft,
Are you interested in this vacancy? Please apply before 30 August 2024.
Research Proposal
Philosophers are increasingly concerned with the impact of socially disruptive technologies on our existing concepts as well as new ones. One such concept that has recently emerged as a response to changing socio-technical circumstances is that of existential risks. The growing field of existential risks focuses on, amongst other things, developing an understanding of how ongoing technological developments (as well as various other large-scale global catastrophic risks) could potentially lead to widespread societal collapse or even human extinction. In fact, some argue that managing and minimizing existential risks is one of the most important tasks of todayās society so as to ensure the long-term flourishing and continued existence of humanity (Bostrom 2013). Barring a few recent exceptions, most discussions appear to happen in isolation from and without proper attention to intercultural philosophical perspectives.
For instance, the concept of existential risk finds its roots in a specific brand of Western-centric normative thinking, thereby conditioning how we frame our inquiry and what we find valuable to prevent existential risks from materializing. Ā One way to challenge this dominant approach to understanding existential risks is by developing what we may call an āintercultural ethics of existential risksā. This approach aims to explore whether and how insights and perspectives from under-represented philosophical traditions bear upon (re)conceptualisation of existential risks (and related concepts), and subsequently, how they address normative and practical questions associated with why their mitigation matters, for whom, and so on. Similar efforts are already underway in areas such as energy justice (c.f. Bombaerts et. al 2020) and AI safety and AI risk ethics (c.f. McStay 2021; Gwagwa, Kazim & Hilliard 2022; Friedman 2023). Extending this approach to existential risks more broadly appears promising in light of a number of reasons.
First, as a general matter, investigating the conceptual roots of existential risks allows us to address whether and how the concept relates to and disrupts our understanding of ordinary concepts in capturing the moral significance of our long-term future. Pursuing this task through the lens of intercultural philosophy has the added advantage of focusing on culturally sensitive values, norms and beliefs that might otherwise be overlooked in our understanding of existential risks and how we ought to mitigate them. Relatedly, an intercultural philosophical approach may help expand our understanding and imagination of potentially catastrophic and dystopian existential risk scenarios that we currently face or might face.
Second, long-standing debates within ethics of risk have criticized quantitative and technological concepts of risk for ignoring the role and value of notions such as control and responsibility, amongst others. Cases of existential risks, such as ones related to climate change, seem to provide a further challenge in light of the well-known difficulties of establishing control and individual responsibility for mitigating them. Again, addressing this through the lens of intercultural philosophy may open up avenues for understanding existential risks through a distinct cluster of concepts such as care, solidarity, empathy, and community, to name a few.
Third, the global scope and nature of existential risks warrants an ethical approach that spans across cultures (rather than ones that risk reinforcing dominant Western ways of thinking and theorizing). Doing so is not only valuable for rethinking our current strategies for mitigation, regulation, and communication of existential risks to members belonging to distinct cultural backgrounds, knowledge, and experiences but also for democratizing existential risk research and avoiding the risk of homogenization of the field in general (Cremer & Kemp 2021).
Finally, given that currently identified existential risks have arguably taken shape due to socio-technical systems grounded in Western thinking, re-considering ethical core values from different cultural perspectives can open new pathways to rethink conventional approaches to technology development. This may involve, for instance, taking on less anthropocentric and profit-driven individualistic approaches and correcting these with insights from non-Western traditions. The social and technical disruption of existential risks might thereby need to be mitigated by conceptually disrupting our current understanding of the ethics of existential risks.
The primary goal of the project is to study existential risks as part of a broader conceptual cluster disrupted by socio-technological developments through the lens of intercultural philosophy or a specific non-Western ethical framework. The resulting approach of āintercultural ethics of existential risksā would be operationalized to explore whether and how insights and perspectives from under-represented philosophical traditions bear upon understanding existential risks (and related concepts), and subsequently, normative and practical questions associated with why their mitigation matters, for whom, and so on. The candidate can approach the project from a general āintercultural philosophy perspectiveā or from a specific non-Western philosophical/ethical framework of their choice. Ā Suitable candidates would ideally already have expertise in ethics and one or more non-Western philosophical traditions and/or training in intercultural philosophy. Interest or familiarity with ongoing discussions in existential risk research is greatly valued.
Main Research Question
How can an intercultural ethics of existential risks contribute to their understanding and mitigation?
Sub-Questions
- Is the concept of existential risk a response to the changing landscape of technological developments or a response to other concepts being disrupted?
- Why is an intercultural philosophical approach relevant to our understanding of existential risks facing humanity?
- What are some Western-centric conceptual and normative assumptions in our current conceptualizations of existential risk(s)?
- What are some implications of Western-centric conceptualizations of existential risks, if any, for practical issues, including but not limited to prioritization of near-term climate change risks over long-term AI risks?
- What are some key concepts, values, and principles important to the development of an āintercultural ethics of existential riskā and how do they relate to or diverge from existing dominant approaches?
- What are some intercultural differences or divergences in our ethical evaluation of existential risks?
- Whether and how intercultural philosophical perspectives allow for disrupting or re-engineering the concept of existential risk(s) and related ones?
- In what respects can intercultural ethics of existential risks broaden the scope of concern and prioritize under-represented or overlooked vulnerable groups?
- What are some normative and practical implications of disrupting or re-engineering the concept of existential risk(s) for the purpose of their responsible regulation, mitigation, and prevention?
Relation to ESDiT research lines
- Foundation and synthesis line
- Nature line
- Society line
- Intercultural track
Key ESDiT concepts to be investigated
- Existential risk
- Existential Safety/Security
- Humanity
- Anthropocentrism
Inter-related sub-concepts:
- Solidarity
- Empathy
- Care
More information
You can find the vacancy on ythe website of the TU Delft via this linkĀ
References
Cremer, Carla Zoe and Kemp, Luke, Democratising Risk: In Search of a Methodology to Study Existential Risk (December 28, 2021). Available at SSRN:Ā https://ssrn.com/abstract=3995225
Evanoff, R. (2006). Integration in intercultural ethics. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS, 30(4), 421ā437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.11.001
Evanoff, R. J. (2004). Universalist, relativist, and constructivist approaches to intercultural ethics. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERCULTURAL RELATIONS, 28(5), 439ā458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2004.08.002
Phipps, A. (2013). Intercultural ethics: Questions of methods in language and intercultural communication. LANGUAGE AND INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION, 13(1), 10ā26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2012.748787
McLaughlin, A. Existential Risk, Climate Change, and Nonideal Justice.Ā The Monist 107(2), 190-206 (2024).Ā https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onae007
Greaves, H. Concepts of Existential Catastrophe. The Monist 107(2), 109-129 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onae002
Friedman, C. Ethical concerns with replacing human relations with humanoid robots: An Ubuntu Perspective.Ā AI EthicsĀ 3, 527ā538 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00186-0
Gwagwa A, Kazim E, Hilliard A. The role of the African value of Ubuntu in global AI inclusion discourse: A normative ethics perspective. Patterns (N Y). 2022 Apr 8;3(4):100462. doi:10.1016/j.patter.2022.100462.
McStay, A. Emotional AI, Ethics, and Japanese Spice: Contributing Community, Wholeness, Sincerity, and Heart.Ā Philos. Technol.Ā 34, 1781ā1802 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00487-y
McKinnon C. Endangering humanity: an international crime?Ā Canadian Journal of Philosophy. 2017;47(2-3):395-415. https://doi.org/10.1080/00455091.2017.1280381
Whyte, K. P. (2018). Indigenous science (fiction) for the Anthropocene: Ancestral dystopias and fantasies of climate change crises. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 1(1-2), 224-242.https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848618777621