Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Can we wrong a robot?Nancy S. Jecker - 2023 - AI and Society 38 (1):259-268.
    With the development of increasingly sophisticated sociable robots, robot-human relationships are being transformed. Not only can sociable robots furnish emotional support and companionship for humans, humans can also form relationships with robots that they value highly. It is natural to ask, do robots that stand in close relationships with us have any moral standing over and above their purely instrumental value as means to human ends. We might ask our question this way, ‘Are there ways we can act towards robots (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Autism, epistemic injustice, and epistemic disablement: a relational account of epistemic agency.Amandine Catala, Luc Faucher & Pierre Poirier - 2021 - Synthese.
    The contrast between third- and first-personal accounts of the experiences of autistic persons has much to teach us about epistemic injustice and epistemic agency. This paper argues that bringing about greater epistemic justice for autistic people requires developing a relational account of epistemic agency. We begin by systematically identifying the many types of epistemic injustice autistic people face, specifically with regard to general assumptions regarding autistic people’s sociability or lack thereof, and by locating the source of these epistemic injustices in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Ethics of Early Intervention in Alzheimer’s Disease.Alex McKeown, Gin S. Malhi & Ilina Singh - forthcoming - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience:1-18.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Metaepistemic Injustice and Intellectual Disability: a Pluralist Account of Epistemic Agency.Amandine Catala - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23 (5):755-776.
    The literature on epistemic injustice currently displays a logocentric or propositional bias that excludes people with intellectual disabilities from the scope of epistemic agency and the demands of epistemic justice. This paper develops an account of epistemic agency and injustice that is inclusive of both people with and people without intellectual disabilities. I begin by specifying the hitherto undertheorized notion of epistemic agency. I develop a broader, pluralist account of epistemic agency, which relies on a conception of knowledge that accounts (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations