Cited by 22Labor market dynamics and wage inequalityEthics and Social Impacts of AIDigital Economy and Work Transformation

Artificial Intelligence and Human Flourishing

Clark, Charles M. A., Gevorkyan, Aleksandr V.·2020·The American Journal of Economics and Sociology

Abstract

The polarization of the debate about artificial intelligence (AI) pulls in two mutually exclusive directions of either complete takeover of future jobs by omnipotent algorithms or an absolute bliss with robots at work while humans reap the benefits of endless vacation. Add this to conflicting views of work as either a disutility to be minimized or as an essential component in human flourishing, and it is no wonder a wide range of views are expressed on AI and human flourishing. The literature, from Smith to Keynes and beyond, offers some initial methodological guidance. Still, the true social and economic implications of an AI‐type environment in production and labor markets are yet to be fully understood. This article argues that neither of the predictions are realistic. Instead, the global economy may be passing, albeit at a faster speed, through a phase of technological change, similar to those experienced before. While a nuanced balance is emerging, with an emphasis on human skills in future employment, the benefits may not be equitably distributed, as equality of opportunities for human development may not be reachable, though visible, in the AI‐driven society. Hence, as firms seek efficiency gains, much weight is shifted onto governments and quasi‐private entities in maintaining decent living standards conducive to human flourishing in unprecedented times of the COVID‐19 pandemic. The article reviews various popular concerns and advances new public policy measures aimed at tackling some of the immediate fears of automation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/ajes.12356

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • If left unaddressed, these blindnesses auger a future where the integration of AI into every nook and cranny of our societies will radically entrench economic inequality.

    “If left unaddressed, these blindnesses auger a future where the integration of AI into every nook and cranny of our societies will radically entrench economic inequality (Clark and Gevorkyan 2020;Goyal and Aneja 2020;Kim 2022)”

    From Abundant intelligences: placing AI within Indigenous knowledge frameworks (2025) · cites this paper as Clark and Gevorkyan 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Clark, C. M. A., & Gevorkyan, A. V.
Affiliations
St. John's University (US)
Corresponding author
Gevorkyan, Aleksandr V.
Venue
The American Journal of Economics and Sociology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2020-09
Volume
79
Issue
4
Pages
1307-1344
ISSN
  • 0002-9246 (ISSN-L)
  • 1536-7150
OpenAlex
W3092199308
Cited by
22
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Journal of Economics and Sociology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Labor market dynamics and wage inequality
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Economy and Work Transformation
Keywords
artificial intelligence, eudaimonia, automation, future of work, technological change, labor market, soft skills, inequality of opportunity, decent standard of living, public policy, COVID-19 pandemic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review