Abstract:Vision is an important metaphor in ethical and political questions of knowledge. The feminist philosopher Donna Haraway points out the ``perverse'' nature of an intrusive, alienating, all-seeing vision (to which we might cry out ``stop looking at me!''), but also encourages us to embrace the embodied nature of sight and its promises for genuinely situated knowledge. Current technologies of machine vision -- surveillance cameras, drones (for war or recreation), iPhone cameras -- are usually construed as instances of the former rather than the latter, and for good reasons. However, although in no way attempting to diminish the real suffering these technologies have brought about in the world, I make the case for understanding technologies of computer vision as material instances of embodied seeing and situated knowing. Furthermore, borrowing from Iris Murdoch's concept of moral vision, I suggest that these technologies direct our labor towards self-reflection in ethically significant ways. My approach draws upon paradigms in computer vision research, phenomenology, and feminist epistemology. Ultimately, this essay is an argument for directing more philosophical attention from merely criticizing technologies of vision as ethically deficient towards embracing them as complex, methodologically and epistemologically important objects.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
### Problems the Paper Attempts to Address
This paper attempts to explore the ethical and political implications of machine vision technology and proposes a new way of understanding it. Specifically, the author tries to address the following issues:
1. **Ethical Issues of Machine Vision Technology**:
- Current machine vision technologies (such as surveillance cameras, drones, etc.) are often seen as intrusive, alienating, and omniscient visual tools. These technologies have brought many negative impacts in practical applications, such as invading privacy, exacerbating social inequality, and harming human life. The author acknowledges that these technologies do cause actual harm but also believes that criticism should not be limited to their ethical shortcomings.
2. **The Technical Nature of Machine Vision**:
- The author argues that machine vision technology is not just a tool but a complex system with a material basis. By drawing on Heidegger's hammer theory, the author points out that we should view machine vision as a "Heideggerian hammer," meaning it is a concrete, limited tool rather than a perfect, omnipotent divine hammer. This perspective helps us to understand and critique machine vision technology more deeply.
3. **Machine Vision and Moral Cognition**:
- Utilizing Iris Murdoch's concept of "moral vision," the author suggests that machine vision technology not only affects our perception but also guides us in moral reflection. Even if we cannot directly attribute a specific ethical orientation to machine vision, these technologies, through their internal perception and cognitive mechanisms, make us more aware of moral realities.
### Main Arguments
1. **Materiality of Machine Vision**:
- By analyzing the material basis of machine vision technology, the author points out that these technologies are not omnipotent divine hammers but limited tools. This materiality makes it impossible for machine vision technology to achieve the so-called "divine trick" (i.e., seeing everything from nowhere).
2. **Machine Vision and Ethical Reflection**:
- The author believes that machine vision technology, through its internal perception and cognitive mechanisms, guides us in moral reflection. This reflection not only helps us better understand the actual impact of these technologies but also promotes our moral self-improvement.
### Conclusion
The author's goal is not to morally defend machine vision technology but to provide a more detailed and comprehensive understanding. By viewing machine vision as a "Heideggerian hammer," we can explore the nature of these technologies and their social and ethical impacts more deeply. This perspective helps us critically and substantively embrace Donna Haraway's view that "understanding how these visual systems work, from technical, social, and psychological levels, should be a way to embody feminist objectivity."