Scholarlink

<p>This commentary is a response to a recent paper by Friedemann Bieber and Charlotte Franziska Unruh, <i>The Potential and Limitations of Artificial Colleagues</i>. In their paper, Bieber and Unruh developed a novel account of the goods of collegial relationships and argued that artificial colleagues are significantly limited in their capacity to realise those collegial goods. This commentary responds to the purported policy implications of their argument. Bieber and Unruh defend a governance principle that gives strict priority to human collegial relationships. I raise some concerns about the efficacy of that principle, and defend a revised version of it that mitigates those concerns.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Human First? The Ethics of Prioritising Human Collegiality in the Workplace

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月25日

查看全文
  • Nicholas George Carroll

摘要

This commentary is a response to a recent paper by Friedemann Bieber and Charlotte Franziska Unruh, The Potential and Limitations of Artificial Colleagues. In their paper, Bieber and Unruh developed a novel account of the goods of collegial relationships and argued that artificial colleagues are significantly limited in their capacity to realise those collegial goods. This commentary responds to the purported policy implications of their argument. Bieber and Unruh defend a governance principle that gives strict priority to human collegial relationships. I raise some concerns about the efficacy of that principle, and defend a revised version of it that mitigates those concerns.