Endre Begby
- Published in print:
- 2021
- Published Online:
- March 2021
- ISBN:
- 9780198852834
- eISBN:
- 9780191887130
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780198852834.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Metaphysics/Epistemology
This chapter addresses recent concerns about “algorithmic bias,” specifically in the context of the criminal justice process. Starting from a recent controversy about the use of “automated risk ...
More
This chapter addresses recent concerns about “algorithmic bias,” specifically in the context of the criminal justice process. Starting from a recent controversy about the use of “automated risk assessment tools” in criminal sentencing and parole hearings, where evidence suggests that such tools effectively discriminate against minority defendants, this chapter argues that the problem here has nothing in particular to do with algorithm-assisted reasoning, nor is it in any clear sense a case of epistemic bias. Rather, given the data set that we are given to work with, there is reason to think that no improvement to our epistemic routines would deliver significantly better results. Instead, the bias is effectively encoded into the data set itself, via a long history of institutionalized racism. This suggests a different diagnosis of the problem: in deeply divided societies, there may just be no way to simultaneously satisfy our moral ideals and our epistemic ideals.Less
This chapter addresses recent concerns about “algorithmic bias,” specifically in the context of the criminal justice process. Starting from a recent controversy about the use of “automated risk assessment tools” in criminal sentencing and parole hearings, where evidence suggests that such tools effectively discriminate against minority defendants, this chapter argues that the problem here has nothing in particular to do with algorithm-assisted reasoning, nor is it in any clear sense a case of epistemic bias. Rather, given the data set that we are given to work with, there is reason to think that no improvement to our epistemic routines would deliver significantly better results. Instead, the bias is effectively encoded into the data set itself, via a long history of institutionalized racism. This suggests a different diagnosis of the problem: in deeply divided societies, there may just be no way to simultaneously satisfy our moral ideals and our epistemic ideals.
Marieke Liem
- Published in print:
- 2016
- Published Online:
- May 2017
- ISBN:
- 9781479806928
- eISBN:
- 9781479860746
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- NYU Press
- DOI:
- 10.18574/nyu/9781479806928.003.0009
- Subject:
- Sociology, Law, Crime and Deviance
Chapter nine arrives at the question who was able to stay out of prison after re-entry, and who was not. It first discusses the strategies these lifers employed to navigate the conditions of parole. ...
More
Chapter nine arrives at the question who was able to stay out of prison after re-entry, and who was not. It first discusses the strategies these lifers employed to navigate the conditions of parole. The interviewees mentioned several reasons in terms of ‘failing’ to stay out of prison: Being recalled for political reasons; catching up too quickly for lost time; falling back into old habits, and returning to prison as a safe place. The vast majority of re-incarcerated lifers returned to prison as a result of a technical violation, not a new criminal offense (criminal recidivism). What we should thus be questioning is not how these lifers are actively ‘going straight’ or desist, but rather, how they manage their parole conditions and similarly, how the parole system manages its parolees. The chapter further details how lifers experience their re-incarceration, with particular attention to older lifers.Less
Chapter nine arrives at the question who was able to stay out of prison after re-entry, and who was not. It first discusses the strategies these lifers employed to navigate the conditions of parole. The interviewees mentioned several reasons in terms of ‘failing’ to stay out of prison: Being recalled for political reasons; catching up too quickly for lost time; falling back into old habits, and returning to prison as a safe place. The vast majority of re-incarcerated lifers returned to prison as a result of a technical violation, not a new criminal offense (criminal recidivism). What we should thus be questioning is not how these lifers are actively ‘going straight’ or desist, but rather, how they manage their parole conditions and similarly, how the parole system manages its parolees. The chapter further details how lifers experience their re-incarceration, with particular attention to older lifers.
