Cargando…
Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation
As a result of contemporary culture’s focus on continuous innovation and “change before you have to,” innovation has been identified with economic gains rather than with creating added value for society. At the same time, given current trends related to the automation of business models, workers see...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9881477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36710805 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1045508 |
_version_ | 1784879113339666432 |
---|---|
author | Redín, Dulce M. Cabaleiro-Cerviño, Goretti Rodriguez-Carreño, Ignacio Scalzo, German |
author_facet | Redín, Dulce M. Cabaleiro-Cerviño, Goretti Rodriguez-Carreño, Ignacio Scalzo, German |
author_sort | Redín, Dulce M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | As a result of contemporary culture’s focus on continuous innovation and “change before you have to,” innovation has been identified with economic gains rather than with creating added value for society. At the same time, given current trends related to the automation of business models, workers seem all but destined to be replaced by machines in the labor market. In this context, we attempt to explore whether robots and Artificial Intelligence (AI) will be able to innovate, and the extent to which said activity is exclusively inherent to human nature. Following the need for a more anthropological view of innovation, we make use of MacIntyrean categories to present innovation as a domain-relative practice with creativity and practical wisdom as its corresponding virtues. We explain why innovation can only be understood within a tradition as it implies participating in inquiry about the principle and end of practical life. We conclude that machines and “intelligent” devices do not have the capacity to innovate and they never will. They may replicate the human capacity for creativity, but they squarely lack the necessary conditions to be a locus of virtue or engage with a tradition. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9881477 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98814772023-01-28 Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation Redín, Dulce M. Cabaleiro-Cerviño, Goretti Rodriguez-Carreño, Ignacio Scalzo, German Front Psychol Psychology As a result of contemporary culture’s focus on continuous innovation and “change before you have to,” innovation has been identified with economic gains rather than with creating added value for society. At the same time, given current trends related to the automation of business models, workers seem all but destined to be replaced by machines in the labor market. In this context, we attempt to explore whether robots and Artificial Intelligence (AI) will be able to innovate, and the extent to which said activity is exclusively inherent to human nature. Following the need for a more anthropological view of innovation, we make use of MacIntyrean categories to present innovation as a domain-relative practice with creativity and practical wisdom as its corresponding virtues. We explain why innovation can only be understood within a tradition as it implies participating in inquiry about the principle and end of practical life. We conclude that machines and “intelligent” devices do not have the capacity to innovate and they never will. They may replicate the human capacity for creativity, but they squarely lack the necessary conditions to be a locus of virtue or engage with a tradition. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9881477/ /pubmed/36710805 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1045508 Text en Copyright © 2023 Redín, Cabaleiro-Cerviño, Rodriguez-Carreño and Scalzo. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychology Redín, Dulce M. Cabaleiro-Cerviño, Goretti Rodriguez-Carreño, Ignacio Scalzo, German Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation |
title | Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation |
title_full | Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation |
title_fullStr | Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation |
title_full_unstemmed | Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation |
title_short | Innovation as a practice: Why automation will not kill innovation |
title_sort | innovation as a practice: why automation will not kill innovation |
topic | Psychology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9881477/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36710805 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1045508 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT redindulcem innovationasapracticewhyautomationwillnotkillinnovation AT cabaleirocervinogoretti innovationasapracticewhyautomationwillnotkillinnovation AT rodriguezcarrenoignacio innovationasapracticewhyautomationwillnotkillinnovation AT scalzogerman innovationasapracticewhyautomationwillnotkillinnovation |