Does Cultural Robotics Need Culture? Conceptual Fragmentation and the Problems of Merging Culture with Robot Design

Author:

Mansouri MasoumehORCID,Taylor Henry

Abstract

AbstractIncreasingly, roboticists have to pay attention to cultural norms and expectations. But roboticists have generally worked with a relatively narrow understanding of culture, based on nationality. This contrasts with the rich and diverse understandings of culture from disciplines as diverse as sociology, philosophy, and anthropology. Here we draw on the philosophy of science literature on scientific terminology to argue that culture is a conceptually fragmented concept: the concept has no unified definition, and alternative definitions of culture are useful for different areas within robotics. We argue that this has important implications for robotics. We consider two possible reactions to this situation. One claims that, despite the lack of a unified definition, the concept of culture still fulfils useful roles within robotics, and ought to be preserved. The other argues that the problems with the concept are so great that the concept ought to be eliminated from discussions in robotics. We argue in favour of the former option.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

General Computer Science,Human-Computer Interaction,Philosophy,Electrical and Electronic Engineering,Control and Systems Engineering,Social Psychology

Reference111 articles.

1. Adorno TW (1991) The culture industry. Routledge, London

2. Agar M (1994) The intercultural frame. Int J Intercult Relat 18(2):221–237

3. Alami R, Albu-Schäffer A, Bicchi A, Bischoff R, Chatila R, De Luca A, De Santis A, Giralt G, Guiochet J, Hirzinger G, Ingrand F (2006) Safe and dependable physical human-robot interaction in anthropic domains: State of the art and challenges. In: 2006 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems. IEEE, pp 1–16

4. Amariglio J, Resnick S, Wolff R (1988) Class, power, and culture. In: Nelson C, Grossberg L (eds) Marxism and the interpretation of culture. University of Illinois, Chicago, pp 487–501

5. Andreason R (2020) Conceptual fragmentation and the use of ‘race’ in scientific theorising. In: Marques T, Wikforss Å (eds) Shifting Concepts: the philosophy and psychology of conceptual variability. Oxford University Press, Oxford

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3