Wilfrid Fleisher
Biographic Data
| ID | 730032 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Wilfrid Fleisher |
| GIVEN NAMES | Wilfrid |
| FAMILY NAME | Fleisher |
| SIGNATURE | FLEISHER W |
| AFFILIATIONS | Georgetown University |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-5980-3970 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 10 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 16 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 10 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1946 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2026 |
| H-INDEX | 3 |
Algorithmic Fairness Criteria as Evidence
Statistical fairness criteria are widely used for diagnosing and ameliorating algorithmic bias. However, these fairness criteria are controversial as their use raises several difficult questions. I argue that the major problems for statistical algorithmic fairness criteria stem from an incorrect understanding of their nature. These criteria are primarily used for two purposes: First, evaluating AI systems for bias, and, second, constraining machi…
Epistemic practices
This paper presents the epistemic practices account, a theory about the nature of epistemic normativity. The account aims to explain how the pursuit of epistemic values such as truth and knowledge can give rise to epistemic norms. On this account, epistemic norms are the internal rules of epistemic social practices. The account explains four crucial features of epistemic normativity while dissolving some apparent tensions between them. The accoun…
Responsibility and Accountability in an Algorithmic Society
This paper articulates the importance of distinguishing responsibility practices from accountability frameworks for the design, development, and deployment of algorithmic decision-making systems. Accountability frameworks are organized social systems associated with particular groups or institutions that employ rule-governed practices to incentivize or sanction specific behaviors. In contrast, responsibility practices concern our everyday notions…
Intellectual courage and inquisitive reasons
Responsibility for Collective Epistemic Harms
Discussion of epistemic responsibility typically focuses on belief formation and actions leading to it. Similarly, accounts of collective epistemic responsibility have addressed the issue of collective belief formation and associated actions. However, there has been little discussion of collective responsibility for preventing epistemic harms, particularly those preventable only by the action of an unorganized group. We propose an account of coll…
Pursuit and inquisitive reasons
How to endorse conciliationism
Virtuous distinctions
Sweden
What to Do with Japan
Pursuit and inquisitive reasons
Virtuous distinctions
How to endorse conciliationism
Responsibility for Collective Epistemic Harms
Discussion of epistemic responsibility typically focuses on belief formation and actions leading to it. Similarly, accounts of collective epistemic responsibility have addressed the issue of collective belief formation and associated actions. However, there has been little discussion of collective responsibility for preventing epistemic harms, particularly those preventable only by the action of an unorganized group. We propose an account of coll…
What to Do with Japan
Sweden
Virtuous distinctions
How to endorse conciliationism
Pursuit and inquisitive reasons
Intellectual courage and inquisitive reasons
Responsibility for Collective Epistemic Harms
Discussion of epistemic responsibility typically focuses on belief formation and actions leading to it. Similarly, accounts of collective epistemic responsibility have addressed the issue of collective belief formation and associated actions. However, there has been little discussion of collective responsibility for preventing epistemic harms, particularly those preventable only by the action of an unorganized group. We propose an account of coll…
Epistemic practices
This paper presents the epistemic practices account, a theory about the nature of epistemic normativity. The account aims to explain how the pursuit of epistemic values such as truth and knowledge can give rise to epistemic norms. On this account, epistemic norms are the internal rules of epistemic social practices. The account explains four crucial features of epistemic normativity while dissolving some apparent tensions between them. The accoun…
Responsibility and Accountability in an Algorithmic Society
This paper articulates the importance of distinguishing responsibility practices from accountability frameworks for the design, development, and deployment of algorithmic decision-making systems. Accountability frameworks are organized social systems associated with particular groups or institutions that employ rule-governed practices to incentivize or sanction specific behaviors. In contrast, responsibility practices concern our everyday notions…
Algorithmic Fairness Criteria as Evidence
Statistical fairness criteria are widely used for diagnosing and ameliorating algorithmic bias. However, these fairness criteria are controversial as their use raises several difficult questions. I argue that the major problems for statistical algorithmic fairness criteria stem from an incorrect understanding of their nature. These criteria are primarily used for two purposes: First, evaluating AI systems for bias, and, second, constraining machi…
Epistemology (6 works) · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (6 works) · Philosophy (6 works) · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies (5 works) · Philosophy of science (3 works) · Political science (3 works) · Psychology (3 works) · Action (physics) (2 works) · Computer Science (2 works) · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI (2 works)