We live in an information network and in an exchange of opinions that is ubiquitous and constant – a net of epistemic acts that we exchange with other agents and affect what we end up believing and deciding. Working with information implies more and more that we face the social effects of this – and these are today faster and faster, and we get a glimpse of them in real time. However, the more agents we have involved, the harder to understand the dynamics of information release turn to be.
This course introduces a formal toolkit that helps in this enterprise.
In particular, the course aims at securing: (1) the understanding of the problems of reasoning that can be triggered by the release of information; (2) the understanding of models that capture the dynamic effects of information release, and the conceptual problems they raise; (3) the problems connected to the representation of belief-merging and, in general, the relations between individual and collective notions of epistemic attitudes;
(4) the understanding of the conditions at which consensus is possible, the role it can play, and the relation between the information release policies, the connection of the epistemic network, and the hierarchies and trust distribution in epistemic communities.
(3) e (4) presuppose (1) and (2). In turn, the last two objectives come with a view on the social impact that the information release policies have on a community of epistemic agents. The course employs a varied package of methods and tools, especially those from Epistemic Logic and Dynamic Epistemic Logic, but also, to a lesser extent, notions and methods from Judgement Aggregation and Network Epistemology, which the course will briefly introduce.
This course introduces a formal toolkit that helps in this enterprise.
In particular, the course aims at securing: (1) the understanding of the problems of reasoning that can be triggered by the release of information; (2) the understanding of models that capture the dynamic effects of information release, and the conceptual problems they raise; (3) the problems connected to the representation of belief-merging and, in general, the relations between individual and collective notions of epistemic attitudes;
(4) the understanding of the conditions at which consensus is possible, the role it can play, and the relation between the information release policies, the connection of the epistemic network, and the hierarchies and trust distribution in epistemic communities.
(3) e (4) presuppose (1) and (2). In turn, the last two objectives come with a view on the social impact that the information release policies have on a community of epistemic agents. The course employs a varied package of methods and tools, especially those from Epistemic Logic and Dynamic Epistemic Logic, but also, to a lesser extent, notions and methods from Judgement Aggregation and Network Epistemology, which the course will briefly introduce.
teacher profile teaching materials
In this course, we will talk about all this: AI, simulations, and how hard it could be, at least in principle, to tell them apart from ‘natural’ intelligent agents and reality, respectively. We will see that this is a particular variation of a question that has been repeatedly asked along human civilization, and that such a question is relevant in all those scenarios in which we can imagine a systematic indistinguishability between two mutually exclusive alternatives that are logically distinct from one another. Standard examples here involve dream and reality, illusion and reality, simulation and reality, natural intelligent agents and artificial intelligent agents.
The course will focus on how this indistinguishability is connected to the exact information available to us, and to the fact that the indistinguishability can persist even if we increase our information. In particular, we will discuss the implications of these scenarios for the stability and the truth of our beliefs on the distinction between simulation (illusion, dream) and reality, on the one hand, and the distinction between natural intelligence and artificial intelligence, on the other. The course will be taught in English, and knowledge of that language is the only necessary preliminary knowledge.
Descartes R. (2005) Discourse on Method and The Meditations, Penguin, London. (Discourse on Method first published in French in 1637).
Mutuazione: 20710706 LOGICS OF INFORMATION AND ACTION - LM in Informazione, editoria, giornalismo LM-19 R CIUNI ROBERTO
Programme
Progress in AI (Artificial Intelligence) is making increasingly hard to tell apart an AI software from a ‘natural’ (that is, non-artificial) intelligent agent, at least in online environments. Progress in virtual reality technologies is prompting questions about theoretical scenarios where simulated reality proves indistinguishable from ‘genuine’ reality.In this course, we will talk about all this: AI, simulations, and how hard it could be, at least in principle, to tell them apart from ‘natural’ intelligent agents and reality, respectively. We will see that this is a particular variation of a question that has been repeatedly asked along human civilization, and that such a question is relevant in all those scenarios in which we can imagine a systematic indistinguishability between two mutually exclusive alternatives that are logically distinct from one another. Standard examples here involve dream and reality, illusion and reality, simulation and reality, natural intelligent agents and artificial intelligent agents.
The course will focus on how this indistinguishability is connected to the exact information available to us, and to the fact that the indistinguishability can persist even if we increase our information. In particular, we will discuss the implications of these scenarios for the stability and the truth of our beliefs on the distinction between simulation (illusion, dream) and reality, on the one hand, and the distinction between natural intelligence and artificial intelligence, on the other. The course will be taught in English, and knowledge of that language is the only necessary preliminary knowledge.
Core Documentation
Chalmers D. (2022) Reality+. Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy, Norton, New York.Descartes R. (2005) Discourse on Method and The Meditations, Penguin, London. (Discourse on Method first published in French in 1637).
Attendance
Attendance is not compulsory.Type of evaluation
Attending students: 1. Presentation on a selected topics in class, in one of the final classes, plus 2. Final report on the same topic, to be submitted with a two-week advance w.r.t. the intended exam date. A list of possible topics for the report will be given while the class is taught. Non-attending students: 1. Final report on a selected topic, to be submitted with a two-week advance w.r.t. the intended exam date, plus 2. Written exam on the topics discussed in class (five open-ended questions, 60 minutes available for the exam). A list of possible topics for the report will be given while the class is taught. The questions in the written exam will be on topics to be found in (1) the two textbooks; (2) some of the selected references that we will discuss meeting by meeting. Each selected reference will be uploaded after the corresponding meeting on the Teams and Moodle platforms for the course. We will evaluate Report: - Ability to structure the report; - Ability to present a central point and argue for it; - Pertinence to the topics dealt with or touched upon in class; - Basic competence in the quoted sources Presentation: - Ability to set the material to be presented; - Ability to present and discuss the material; - Ability to defend and justify one’s own claims; - Basic competence in the quoted sources. Written exam: - Knowledge of the notions and theories introduced by the course; - Knowledge of the different views and their criticisms discussed in the course; - the abilities of specifying and discussing such notions and such views, and their importance. Students with disability and specific learning disorders can apply for tools to be admitted during the exam via the following link: https://www.uniroma3.it/roma-tre-inclusiva-studenti-con-disabilita-e-con-dsa/