Final answer:
Arguments for changing algorithms based on fairness encompass promoting equality in the market, adhering to affirmative action philosophies, and ensuring the effective functioning of AI without bias. Economic incentives can motivate businesses to be less discriminatory, all the while public policies aim to reduce historic inequality. Ethics and the impact of discrimination on market efficiency are central to this discourse.
Step-by-step explanation:
When it comes to whether a company should change its algorithms based on fairness, several arguments can be made for and against such actions. From an economic standpoint, markets strive to reach equilibrium where supply matches demand. The effectiveness of this system is often scrutinized, especially when considering the impact of discrimination and earnings gaps based on race and gender.
In competitive markets, discrimination can deter efficiency by preventing the most capable individuals from obtaining the jobs they are best suited for. For instance, in scenarios where a company may have biases against certain groups, market forces can provide incentives to reduce discrimination. For example, if a flower delivery business discovers that a substantial portion of its customer base is from a community it discriminates against, it could face a loss in revenue if it does not adapt its practices to more inclusive algorithms, thereby potentially motivating change.
U.S. public policies such as affirmative action are designed to ameliorate the effects of past discrimination by encouraging diversity and compensating for historical imbalances. Philosophers like James Rachels, Judith Jarvis Thomson, and Mary Anne Warren have all provided ethical supports for such policies, citing the need for redress and overall fairness in hiring and admissions. Furthermore, the advent of artificial intelligence presents new challenges, where algorithms can inherently carry biases, thus necessitating transparency and careful control to ensure equitable outcomes.