算法自动决策的治理反思:基于实践理性的路径调试与法理因应

Governance Reflection on Algorithmic Automated Decision-Making:Pathway Adjustment and Jurisprudential Response Based on Practical Reason

工具理性的越位致使针对算法自动决策的治理逻辑也被工具理性思维所占据。工具理性主义主导下的算法治理在治理议题上强调算法透明度;在治理路径上,通过“技术标准”展开治理。学界习惯通过呼吁价值理性的回归来纠正算法治理中呈现的工具理性的异化,但是由于其无法实现算法治理理论与实践的统一,因此具有片面性。实践理性一方面由于其自身蕴含着价值的多重内容,因而能够替代价值理性实现对治理中工具理性主义的纠偏;另一方面由于其蕴含着价值的实现方式,进而能够破除治理理论与实践的分裂问题,并使得算法治理导向一种立基于“厚”的制度逻辑的“数字治理”范式。在此过程中,算法治理开始将研究重心从治理对象转向治理过程、从理论维度转向工程维度。在此基础上,实践理性也完成了对法学研究愈发“技术化”的纠偏,提升了法理学应对现实问题的回应度,并引导未来的法学研究进行“转出理论”和“转向工程”的转变。

The misalignment caused by instrumental reason has led to the governance logic of algorithmic automated decision-making being dominated by instrumental reason thinking.Under the dominance of instrumental reason,algorithm governance emphasizes algorithm transparency on governance issues and implements governance through“technical standards”in the governance pathway.Academia typically calls for the return of value reason to correct the alienation of instrumental reason in algorithm governance.However,this approach is one-sided because it fails to achieve the unity of algorithm governance theory and practice.Practical reason,on the one hand,can replace value reason to correct the deviation of instrumental reason in governance due to its inherent multifarious value content.On the other hand,because it contains the means of realizing values,it can overcome the division between governance theory and practice,leading algorithm governance towards a“thick”institutional logic-based“digital governance”paradigm.In this process,algorithm governance shifts its focus from governance objects to governance processes,from theoretical dimensions to engineering dimensions.On this basis,practical reason also corrects the increasing“technicalization”of legal research,enhances the responsiveness of jurisprudence to real-world problems,and guides future legal research towards a transformation“out of theory”and“towards engineering”.