Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:22:22.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Responsible Dissemination in Sexual Orientation Research: The Case of the AI “Gaydar”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 May 2022

Andreas De Block Open the ORCID record for Andreas De Block [Opens in a new window]  and
Stijn Conix Open the ORCID record for Stijn Conix [Opens in a new window]
Andreas De Block*
Affiliation:
Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, Institute of Philosophy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
Stijn Conix
Affiliation:
Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, Institute of Philosophy, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
*
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A recent controversy about neural networks allegedly capable of detecting a person’s sexual orientation raises the question of whether all research on homosexuality should be permitted. This paper considers two arguments for limits to such research, and concludes that there are good reasons to limit at least the dissemination of applied research on the etiology of homosexuality. The paper then briefly sketches how this could work, and looks at three objections against these limitations.

Type
Symposia Paper
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 89 , Issue 5 , December 2022 , pp. 1075 - 1084
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bailey, April, and Knobe, Joshua. 2021. “Biological Essentialism Correlates with (But Doesn’t Cause?) Intergroup Bias.” Preprint, submitted September 17, 2021. https://psyarxiv.com/rx8jc/.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brundage, Miles, Shahar Avin, Jack Clark, Helen Toner, Peter Eckersley, Ben Garfinkel, Allan Dafoe, et al. 2018. “The Malicious Use of Artificial Intelligence: Forecasting, Prevention, and Mitigation.” ArXiv:1802.07228 [Cs]. Preprint, submitted February 20, 2018. http://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07228.Google Scholar
Carrier, M. 2021. “How to conceive of science for the benefit of society: prospects of responsible research and innovation.” Synthese 198 (19):4749–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Block, Andreas, and Adriaens, Pieter R.. 2013. “Pathologizing sexual deviance: A history.” Journal of Sex Research 50 (3-4):276–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 1995. “Animal Models for the Development of Human Sexuality: A Critical Evaluation.” Journal of Homosexuality 28 (3-4):217–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, Andrew, Marrson, Greggor, and Simpson, Daniel. 2018. “Gaydar and the fallacy of objective measurement.” Preprint, retrieved from http://www.stat.columbia.edu/∼gelman/research/unpublished/gaydar2.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Householder, Allen D., Wassermann, Garrett, Manion, Art, and King, Chris. 2017. The cert guide to coordinated vulnerability disclosure. Government Technical Report. Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
Hull, David. 1998. “On Human Nature.” In The Philosophy of Biology, edited by Hull, David and Ruse, Michael, 383–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. 2001. Science, Truth, and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kourany, J. A. 2016. “Should some knowledge be forbidden? The case of cognitive differences research.” Philosophy of Science 83 (5):779–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Långström, Niklas, Rahman, Qazi, Carlström, Eva, and Lichtenstein, Paul. 2010. “Genetic and environmental effects on same-sex sexual behavior: A population study of twins in Sweden.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 39 (1):75–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leuner, John. 2019. “A Replication Study: Machine Learning Models Are Capable of Predicting Sexual Orientation From Facial Images.” Preprint, submitted February 27, 2019. arXiv:1902.10739.Google Scholar
Margolin, Leslie. 2021. “The Third Backdoor: How the DSM Casebooks Pathologized Homosexuality.” Journal of Homosexuality. https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2021.1945340.Google ScholarPubMed
Miller, Arianne. 2018. “Searching for gaydar: Blind spots in the study of sexual orientation perception.” Psychology & Sexuality 9 (3):188–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Research Council (NRC). 2004. Biotechnology research in an age of terrorism. Washington, DC: National Academies.Google Scholar
Oldham, Jeff, and Kasser, Tim. 1999. “Attitude change in response to information that male homosexuality has a biological basis.” Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy 25 (2):121–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ovadya, Aviv, and Whittlestone, Jess. 2019. “Reducing Malicious Use of Synthetic Media Research: Considerations and Potential Release Practices for Machine Learning.” ArXiv:1907.11274 [Cs], http://arxiv.org/abs/1907.11274.Google Scholar
Plant, Richard. 2011. The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals. New York: Holt paperbacks.Google Scholar
Selgelid, Michael. 2009. “Dual-Use Research Codes of Conduct: Lessons from the Life Sciences.” NanoEthics 3 (3):175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11569-009-0074-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schüklenk, Udo, Stein, Edward, Kerin, Jacinta, and Byne, William. 1997. “The ethics of genetic research on sexual orientation.” Hastings Center Report 27 (4): 6–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stein, Edward. 1999. The Mismeasure of Desire. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Talisse, Robert, and Aikin, Scott. 2007. “Kitcher on the ethics of inquiry.” Journal of Social Philosophy 38 (4):654–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tam, Vivian, Patel, Nikunj, Turcotte, Michelle, Bossé, Yohan, Paré, Guillaume, and Meyre, David. 2019. “Benefits and limitations of genome-wide association studies.” Nature Reviews Genetics 20 (8):467–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, Yilun, and Kosinski, Michal. 2018. “Deep neural networks are more accurate than humans at detecting sexual orientation from facial images.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 114 (2):246–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Whittlestone, Jess, and Ovadya, Aviv. 2020. “The Tension between Openness and Prudence in AI Research.” ArXiv:1910.01170 [Cs], http://arxiv.org/abs/1910.01170.Google Scholar