Moral zombies: why algorithms are not moral agents

被引:0
作者
Carissa Véliz
机构
[1] Hertford College,Institute for Ethics in AI, Faculty of Philosophy
[2] University of Oxford,undefined
来源
AI & SOCIETY | 2021年 / 36卷
关键词
Algorithms; Moral agency; Moral responsibility; Autonomous systems; Zombies; Accountability; Autonomy; Sentience; Consciousness; Reasons-responsiveness;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In philosophy of mind, zombies are imaginary creatures that are exact physical duplicates of conscious subjects for whom there is no first-personal experience. Zombies are meant to show that physicalism—the theory that the universe is made up entirely out of physical components—is false. In this paper, I apply the zombie thought experiment to the realm of morality to assess whether moral agency is something independent from sentience. Algorithms, I argue, are a kind of functional moral zombie, such that thinking about the latter can help us better understand and regulate the former. I contend that the main reason why algorithms can be neither autonomous nor accountable is that they lack sentience. Moral zombies and algorithms are incoherent as moral agents because they lack the necessary moral understanding to be morally responsible. To understand what it means to inflict pain on someone, it is necessary to have experiential knowledge of pain. At most, for an algorithm that feels nothing, ‘values’ will be items on a list, possibly prioritised in a certain way according to a number that represents weightiness. But entities that do not feel cannot value, and beings that do not value cannot act for moral reasons.
引用
收藏
页码:487 / 497
页数:10
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
Behdadi D(2020)A Normative approach to artificial moral agency Minds Mach 30 195-218
[2]  
Munthe C(2012)The superintelligent will: motivation and instrumental rationality in advanced artificial agents Mind Mach 22 71-85
[3]  
Bostrom N(2016)"Do unto others"? Distinct psychopathy facets predict reduced perception and tolerance of pain Personal Disord 7 240-246
[4]  
Brislin SJ(2017)Of, For, and by the people: the legal lacuna of synthetic persons Artif Intell Law 25 273-291
[5]  
Buchman-Schmitt JM(2019)Motivations and risks of machine ethics Proc IEEE 107 562-574
[6]  
Joiner TE(2016)Responsibility and the moral phenomenology of using self-driving cars Appl Artif Intell 30 748-757
[7]  
Bryson JJ(2016)Robots, law and the retribution gap Ethics Inform Technol 18 299-309
[8]  
Diamantis ME(2020)Welcoming robots into the moral circle: a defence of ethical behaviourism Sci Eng Ethics 26 2023-2049
[9]  
Grant TD(2004)On the Morality of Artificial Agents Minds Mach 14 349-379
[10]  
Cave S(2007)The responsibility of the psychopath revisited Philos Psychiatry Psychol 14 129-138