Programa de actividades

El uso de Inteligencia Artificial (IA) en la gestión de la educación y los procesos de enseñanza aprendizaje implica riesgos y oportunidades en materia de desigualdades educativas. Se trata de un tema que se ha analizado relativamente poco en la literatura y aún en menor medida en las posibles respuestas de la gobernanza global y las políticas públicas. El texto que se presentará tiene como objetivo identificar algunas de las principales respuestas necesarias tanto a nivel de gobernanza global como de políticas para potenciar las oportunidades y afrontar los desafíos en materia de desigualdades educativas, a partir de uso de la IA en la educación. Para ello, se recurrió a una revisión de literatura exhaustiva e integradora, considerando principalmente revistas académicas además de libros y reportes especializados. Como resultado de la investigación se identificaron cinco ejes temáticos en los que se agrupan algunas acciones y elementos de las respuestas que podrían contribuir a poner la equidad en el centro del uso de la IA en la educación.

This paper seeks to understand the ways in which AI may tend to reproduce paradigms of patriarchal and colonial domination of the North over the South and of men over women. I ask whether an AI hardwired with colonialism can reject the oppression of the white man: is AI a way to continue the project of coloniality? I address this question by looking at the main fear elicited by created intelligence in cultural productions such as film, television and literature: the possibility that it may become self-aware and turn against its creator. Although these fears stem mostly from fiction, they are very real, and the mostly male designers of AI systems look to appease them (while simultaneously exerting domination) by feminizing AI – for instance by creating the gendered AI digital assistants Siri and Alexa. In this, they are enacting a generalized belief that created females would never gain consciousness to resist their male dominators. However, following studies on AI design biases and by using the example of Lily, Victor Frankenstein’s creation in the television series Penny Dreadful, I argue that when AI is designed as female through the sedimented (un)conscious patriarchal drives of men, she will be a female with a pre-loaded design / experience of abuse and domination. As such, a female AI may be more likely than a male one to become self-aware and seek to destroy her dominators. Although the study of horror fiction is scarce within IR, this exploration of AI in light of horror highlights the stakes for both North and South of getting coloniality and patriarchy out of AI.

Although international politics is not what first comes to mind when one thinks of the novel *Frankenstein* (1818), the geopolitical state of the Europe in which it unfolds is a key condition of the story: the ability of several central characters to move freely across the continent is itself a key character in the novel. Guillermo del Toro’s recent movie adaptation amplifies and modifies the story’s geopolitics by making some unidentified war an essential driver of the action. Through the new character of Heinrich Harlander, an arms dealer who is profiting from the conflict and who finances Victor Frankenstein’s attempt to create new life, war becomes a condition of possibility for Victor’s breakthrough. Harlander’s motivations and the source of his wealth have been read by critics as telling us something specific about our own time: he counts as an avatar of our tech billionaires, with his ambitions amounting to a warning about artificial intelligence. In this paper, I explore this claim, focusing on two issues: first, the impact of the irruption of war and geopolitics in a narrative otherwise rooted in a (wholly fictive) peaceable Europe; and second, the ways in which A.I. may or may not be read into the story. I find that, first, by foregrounding war and geopolitics, del Toro’s *Frankenstein* both reclaims something of the real warring Europe of the late 18th century and deepens the novel’s account of the social anchoring of scientific, technological and political change. And second, that Silicon Valley culture does infuse the film, but not quite in the ways that critics flag: while A.I dominates the current cultural conversation and can be linked to Victor Frankenstein’s god-like ambition to create life, it is only one aspect of Silicon Valley’s cultural hold on Shelley’s / del Toro’s characters - and on us.