Abstract
Deepfakes are audio, video, or still-image digital artifacts created by the use of artificial intelligence technology, as opposed to traditional means of recording. Because deepfakes can look and sound much like genuine digital recordings, they have entered the popular imagination as sources of serious epistemic problems for us, as we attempt to navigate the increasingly treacherous digital information environment of the internet. In this paper, I attempt to clarify what epistemic problems deepfakes pose and why they pose these problems, by drawing parallels between recordings and our own senses as sources of evidence. I show that deepfakes threaten to undermine the status of digital recordings as evidence. The existence of deepfakes thus encourages a kind of skepticism about digital recordings that bears important similarities to classic philosophical skepticism concerning the senses. However, the skepticism concerning digital recordings that deepfakes motivate is also importantly different from classical skepticism concerning the senses, and I argue that these differences illuminate some possible strategies for solving the epistemic problems posed by deepfakes.
References
Barthes, R. 1981. Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. R Howard, tr. New York: Hill & Wang.Suche in Google Scholar
Benovsky, J. 2016. “Depiction and Imagination.” SATS 17 (1): 61–80, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25334-3_4.Suche in Google Scholar
Brueckner, A. 1994. “The Structure of the Skeptical Argument.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (4): 827–35, https://doi.org/10.2307/2108413.Suche in Google Scholar
Burt, T., and E. Horvitz. 2020. New Steps to Combat Disinformation. Also available at https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2020/09/01/disinformation-deepfakes-newsguard-video-authenticator/.Suche in Google Scholar
Cavedon-Taylor, D. 2013. “Photographically Based Knowledge.” Episteme 10: 283–97, https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2013.213.Suche in Google Scholar
Clement, J. 2020. YouTube—Statistics and Facts. Also available at https://www.statista.com/topics/2019/youtube/.Suche in Google Scholar
Daguerre, L. J. M. 1980. “Daguerreotype.” In Classic Essays on Photography, edited by A. Trachtenberg, 11–13. New Haven: Leete’s Island Books. Original work published 1838.Suche in Google Scholar
Descartes, R. 1996. Meditations on First Philosophy. J. Cottingham, tr. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Original work published 1641.10.1017/CBO9780511805028Suche in Google Scholar
Ewing, P. 2019. What You Need to Know about Fake Video, Audio and the 2020 Election. NPR. Also available at https://www.npr.org/2019/09/02/754415386/what-you-need-to-know-about-fake-video-audio-and-the-2020-election.Suche in Google Scholar
Fallis, D. 2020. “The Epistemic Threat of Deepfakes.” Philosophy & Technology: 1–21, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00419-2.Suche in Google Scholar
Fisher, M., J. C. Woodrow, and P. Hermann. 2016. Pizzagate: From Rumor, to Hashtag, to Gunfire in D.C. The Washington Post. Also available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pizzagate-from-rumor-to-hashtag-to-gunfire-in-dc/2016/12/06/4c7def50-bbd4-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html.Suche in Google Scholar
Floridi, L. 2011. The Philosophy of Information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232383.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Floridi, L. 2018. “Artificial Intelligence, Deepfakes, and a Future of Ectypes.” Philosophy & Technology 31: 317–21, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0325-3.Suche in Google Scholar
Goldman, A. I. 1976. “Discrimination and Perceptual Knowledge.” Journal of Philosophy 73: 771–91, https://doi.org/10.2307/2025679.Suche in Google Scholar
Grinberg, N., K. Joseph, L. Friedland, B. Swire-Thompson, and D. Lazer. 2019. “Fake News on Twitter During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election.” Science 363 (6425): 374–8, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706.Suche in Google Scholar
Latour, B. 1999. “Circulating Reference. Sampling the Soil in the Amazon Forest.” In Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, 24–79. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Locke, J. 1975. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, edited by P. H. Nidditch, 1–656. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Original work published 1689.10.1093/oseo/instance.00018020Suche in Google Scholar
Maddy, P. 2017. What Philosophers Do: Skepticism and the Practice of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190618698.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Madrigal, A. 2017. What Facebook Did to American Democracy. The Atlantic. Also available at https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/10/what-facebook-did/542502/.Suche in Google Scholar
Magnus, P. D. 2009. “On Trusting Wikipedia.” Episteme 6: 74–90, https://doi.org/10.3366/e17423600080005551.Suche in Google Scholar
McKernon, E. 1925. “Fake News and the Public.” Harpers Magazine 151: 528–36.Suche in Google Scholar
Nguyen, C. T. 2020. “Echo Chambers and Epistemic Bubbles.” Episteme 17 (2): 141–61, https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2018.32.Suche in Google Scholar
O’Connor, C., and J. O. Weatherall. 2019. The Misinformation Age. New Haven: Yale University Press.10.2307/j.ctv8jp0hkSuche in Google Scholar
Oreskes, N., and E. M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of Doubt. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Phillips, D. M. 2009. “Photography and Causation: Responding to Scruton’s Scepticism.” British Journal of Aesthetics 49 (4): 327–40, https://doi.org/10.1093/aesthj/ayp036.Suche in Google Scholar
Prater, N., and M. Hartmann. 2021. Chauvin Trial Closing Arguments: ‘You Can Believe Your Eyes’. New York Intelligencer. Also available at https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/derek-chauvin-trial-everything-you-need-to-know.html.Suche in Google Scholar
Rini, R. 2020. “Deepfakes and the Epistemic Backstop.” Philosopher’s Imprint 20 (24): 1–16.Suche in Google Scholar
Skyrms, B. 2010. Signals. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199580828.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Starbird, K. 2017. “Examining the Alternative Media Ecosystem through the Production of Alternative Narratives of Mass Shooting Events on Twitter.” In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 11(1), 1–10. Menlo Park: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.10.1609/icwsm.v11i1.14878Suche in Google Scholar
Stroud, B. 1984. The Significance of Philosophical Scepticism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0198247613.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Toews, R. 2020. Deepfakes Are Going to Wreak Havoc on Society. We Are Not Prepared. Forbes. Also available at https://www.forbes.com/sites/robtoews/2020/05/25/deepfakes-are-going-to-wreak-havoc-on-society-we-are-not-prepared/#5e61a3367494.Suche in Google Scholar
Ulin, D. 2015. Review: David K. Shipler’s ‘Freedom of Speech’ Reflects Our Fractured Times. Los Angeles Times. Also available at https://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-ca-jc-david-shipler-20150503-story.html.Suche in Google Scholar
Vosoughi, S., D. Roy, and S. Aral. 2018. “The Spread of True and False News Online.” Science 359 (6380): 1146–51, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559.Suche in Google Scholar
Walton, K. 1984. “Transparent Pictures: On the Nature of Photographic Realism.” Critical Inquiry 11 (2): 246–77, https://doi.org/10.1086/448287.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Increasing Philosophical Dialogue through Special Issues, Peer-Reviewed Articles and Book Reviews: The Future of SATS – Northern European Journal of Philosophy
- Articles
- Philosophy of Scientific Malpractice
- Skepticism and the Digital Information Environment
- Texts: A Case Study of Joint Action
- To Each Incel According to His Needs?
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Increasing Philosophical Dialogue through Special Issues, Peer-Reviewed Articles and Book Reviews: The Future of SATS – Northern European Journal of Philosophy
- Articles
- Philosophy of Scientific Malpractice
- Skepticism and the Digital Information Environment
- Texts: A Case Study of Joint Action
- To Each Incel According to His Needs?