Tokyo Forum For Analytic Philosophy

Program

Friday 19 Apr 2024
Adrian K. Yee & Andre Curtis-Trudel

A.I. Interpretability: Ethics and Philosophy of Science

Speaker: Adrian K. Yee & Andre Curtis-Trudel
From: Lingnan University
URL: https://sites.google.com/site/adriankyee/
Abstract: (Note: The two speakers will present separate 30min papers, followed by the usual discussion period.) Adrian K. Yee: 'Machine Learning, Interpretability, & Drone Strikes': While drone strikes have become a mainstream topic in military ethics, increasing? usage of controversial machine learning methods in the development of automated? weapons systems remains under analyzed from a philosophical perspective. I argue? that problems of the interpretability of algorithms present uniquely difficult issues in contemporary drone strike methodology. With reference to a recent policy document from the? US Department of Defense, and drawing upon historical sources, I argue for an? account of algorithmic interpretability that is most appropriate for enhancing our? abilities to assign proportionate moral responsibility to the numerous actors involved in drone strikes. Andre Curtis-Trudel: 'What can philosophy of science do for XAI?' The recent and striking success of deep learning models (DLMs) in a variety of domains has driven an explosion of interest in explainable AI (XAI) techniques and methods, the goal of which is to render opaque DLMs and their decisions comprehensible to human users. Yet XAI is still in its infancy, and significant conceptual and technical problems remain to be addressed. Increasingly, XAI practitioners are looking to the philosophy of science for guidance regarding key notions such as ‘explanation’, ‘interpretation’, and ‘understanding’, among others. The goal of this talk is to identify some of the more prominent uses - and abuses - of philosophical work on these notions, and to mark off some potentially fruitful avenues for collaboration between philosophers of science and XAI practitioners.

 
 
Friday 10 May 2024
Rachel Goodman

Shared Thought and Communication

Speaker: Rachel Goodman
From: University of Illinois Chicago
URL: https://phil.uic.edu/profiles/goodman-rachel/
Abstract: On a Fregean view of communication, communication requires shared sense. On a Russellian view of communication, it requires only shared reference and fulfillment of what I will call transactional requirements. My first aim is to illustrate that the Fregean view is dialectically unstable: the Fregean must explain some failures of communication in terms of difference of sense, and others in terms of failure to meet transactional requirements, without an explanation of the difference. However, even among those who shy away from the Fregean view, hesitation to embrace a Russellian view is common, so my second aim is to ask whether this is justified. I do so by clarifying the relationship between Russellianism about communication and relationism about communication—a view which provides a third option. I’ll suggest a way to adjudicate between these views by clarifying a commitment shared by the Fregean and the relationist, but rejected by the Russellian. If this commitment is justified, then given the instability of the Fregean view, relationism is preferable. However, the upshot may rather be that traditional dissatisfaction with a Russellian view of communication is undermotivated.

 
 
Friday 24 May 2024
Yafeng Shan

Proximate and Ultimate Causation

Speaker: Yafeng Shan
From: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
URL: https://www.shanyafeng.com/
Abstract: It has been over 60 years since Ernst Mayr famously argued for the distinction between proximate and ultimate causes in biology. In the following decades, Mayr’s proximate-ultimate distinction was well received within evolutionary biology and widely regarded as a major contribution to the philosophy of biology. Despite its enormous influence, there has been a persistent controversy on the distinction. It has been argued that the distinction is untenable. In addition, there have been complaints about the pragmatic value of the distinction in biological research. Some even suggest that the distinction should better be abandoned. In contrast, Mayr had consistently maintained the significance of the proximate-ultimate distinction in biology. There are also other attempts to defend the distinction. The talk will examine the debate by taking an integrated History and Philosophy of Science approach and argue for a functional approach to causal concepts in scientific practice.

 
 
Friday 7 Jun 2024
Emil Andersson

TBA

Speaker: Emil Andersson
From: Uppsala University
URL: https://www.emilandersson.org/
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 21 Jun 2024
Kiyohiro Sen

TBA

Speaker: Kiyohiro Sen
From: University of Tokyo
URL: https://www.senkiyohiro.com/home2
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 5 Jul 2024
Maximilian Tegtmeier

TBA

Speaker: Maximilian Tegtmeier
From: National University of Singapore
URL: https://philpeople.org/profiles/maximilian-tegtmeyer
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 19 Jul 2024
Krys Dolega

Speaker: Krys Dolega
From: Center for Cognition and Neurosciences, Université Libre de Bruxelles
URL: https://www.krysdolega.xyz/about/
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 11 Oct 2024
Joel van Fossen

TBA

Speaker: Joel van Fossen
From: Hosei University
URL: http://gis.hosei.ac.jp/cms/?professor=joel-van-fossen
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 8 Nov 2024
Giada Fratantonio

TBA

Speaker: Giada Fratantonio
From: Universities of Glasgow and Aberdeen
URL: http://giada-fratantonio.weebly.com/
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 15 Nov 2024
Joshua Rowan Thorpe

TBA

Speaker: Joshua Rowan Thorpe
From: Universities of Glasgow and Aberdeen
URL: https://www.joshuarowanthorpe.com/
Abstract: TBA

 
 
Friday 13 Dec 2024
Heng Ying

TBA

Speaker: Heng Ying
From: Hong Kong University
URL: https://philpeople.org/profiles/heng-ying
Abstract: TBA