Workplace automation without achievement gaps: a reply to Danaher and Nyholm

  • Tigard D
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In a recent article in this journal, John Danaher and Sven Nyholm raise well-founded concerns that the advances in AI-based automation will threaten the values of meaningful work. In particular, they present a strong case for thinking that automation will undermine our achievements, thereby rendering our work less meaningful. It is also claimed that the threat to achievements in the workplace will open up ‘achievement gaps’—the flipside of the ‘responsibility gaps’ now commonly discussed in technology ethics. This claim, however, is far less worrisome than the general concerns for widespread automation, namely because it rests on several conceptual ambiguities. With this paper, I argue that although the threat to achievements in the workplace is problematic and calls for policy responses of the sort Danaher and Nyholm outline, when framed in terms of responsibility, there are no ‘achievement gaps’.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tigard, D. W. (2021). Workplace automation without achievement gaps: a reply to Danaher and Nyholm. AI and Ethics, 1(4), 611–617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-021-00064-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free