Living with AI personal assistant: an ethical appraisal

IF 4.7 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AI & Society Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.1007/s00146-023-01776-0

Lorraine K. C. Yeung, Cecilia S. Y. Tam, Sam S. S. Lau, Mandy M. Ko

{"title":"Living with AI personal assistant: an ethical appraisal","authors":"Lorraine K. C. Yeung, Cecilia S. Y. Tam, Sam S. S. Lau, Mandy M. Ko","doi":"10.1007/s00146-023-01776-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Mark Coeckelbergh (Int J Soc Robot 1:217–221, 2009) argues that robot ethics should investigate what interaction with robots can do to humans rather than focusing on the robot’s moral status. We should ask what robots do to our sociality and whether human–robot interaction can contribute to the human good and human flourishing. This paper extends Coeckelbergh’s call and investigate what it means to live with disembodied AI-powered agents. We address the following question: Can the human–AI interaction contribute to our moral development? We present an empirically informed philosophical analysis of how the AI personal assistant Siri changes its users’ way of life, based on the responses obtained from 20 semi-directive individual interviews with Siri users. We identify changes in the users’ social interaction associated with the adoption of Siri. These changes include: (1) the indirect effect of reducing opportunities of human interaction, (2) the second-order effect of diminished expectations toward each other in a community, and (3) the acquired preference to obtain hassle-free interaction with Siri over human interaction. We examine them in relation to concerns that are voiced in the current debates over the rise of AI, namely the suspicion that humans could become overly reliant on AI (Danaher 2019) and the worry that social AI could impede on moral development (Fröding and Peterson, Ethics Inf Technol 23:207–214, 2012; Li, Ethics Inf Technol 23:543–550, 2021). We analyze the ethical costs that come from these changes in light of virtue ethics and address potential objections along the way. We end by offering directions for thinking about how to live with AI personal assistant while preserving favorable conditions for moral development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47165,"journal":{"name":"AI & Society","volume":"39 6","pages":"2813 - 2828"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AI & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-023-01776-0","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mark Coeckelbergh (Int J Soc Robot 1:217–221, 2009) argues that robot ethics should investigate what interaction with robots can do to humans rather than focusing on the robot’s moral status. We should ask what robots do to our sociality and whether human–robot interaction can contribute to the human good and human flourishing. This paper extends Coeckelbergh’s call and investigate what it means to live with disembodied AI-powered agents. We address the following question: Can the human–AI interaction contribute to our moral development? We present an empirically informed philosophical analysis of how the AI personal assistant Siri changes its users’ way of life, based on the responses obtained from 20 semi-directive individual interviews with Siri users. We identify changes in the users’ social interaction associated with the adoption of Siri. These changes include: (1) the indirect effect of reducing opportunities of human interaction, (2) the second-order effect of diminished expectations toward each other in a community, and (3) the acquired preference to obtain hassle-free interaction with Siri over human interaction. We examine them in relation to concerns that are voiced in the current debates over the rise of AI, namely the suspicion that humans could become overly reliant on AI (Danaher 2019) and the worry that social AI could impede on moral development (Fröding and Peterson, Ethics Inf Technol 23:207–214, 2012; Li, Ethics Inf Technol 23:543–550, 2021). We analyze the ethical costs that come from these changes in light of virtue ethics and address potential objections along the way. We end by offering directions for thinking about how to live with AI personal assistant while preserving favorable conditions for moral development.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

与人工智能私人助理一起生活：一种道德评价

Mark Coeckelbergh （Int J Soc Robot 1:17 - 221, 2009）认为机器人伦理应该调查与机器人的互动会对人类造成什么影响，而不是关注机器人的道德地位。我们应该问机器人对我们的社会有什么影响，人机互动是否有助于人类的福祉和人类的繁荣。本文扩展了Coeckelbergh的呼吁，并研究了与无实体人工智能驱动的代理一起生活意味着什么。我们要解决以下问题：人类与人工智能的互动是否有助于我们的道德发展？基于对Siri用户进行的20次半指向性个人访谈的反馈，我们对人工智能个人助理Siri如何改变用户的生活方式进行了实证的哲学分析。我们发现，随着Siri的采用，用户的社交互动发生了变化。这些变化包括：(1)人与人之间互动机会减少的间接影响；(2)社区中对彼此期望降低的二阶影响；(3)获得性偏好与Siri进行无障碍互动，而不是与人互动。我们根据当前关于人工智能兴起的辩论中所表达的担忧来研究它们，即怀疑人类可能会过度依赖人工智能（Danaher 2019），以及担心社交人工智能可能会阻碍道德发展(Fröding和Peterson， Ethics inftechnol 23:07 - 214, 2012；李，伦理信息技术23:543-550,2021)。我们从道德伦理的角度分析了这些变化所带来的伦理成本，并在此过程中解决了潜在的反对意见。最后，我们提出了如何与人工智能个人助理一起生活，同时保持道德发展的有利条件的思考方向。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

AI & Society COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE-

CiteScore

8.00

自引率

20.00%

发文量

257

期刊介绍： AI & Society: Knowledge, Culture and Communication, is an International Journal publishing refereed scholarly articles, position papers, debates, short communications, and reviews of books and other publications. Established in 1987, the Journal focuses on societal issues including the design, use, management, and policy of information, communications and new media technologies, with a particular emphasis on cultural, social, cognitive, economic, ethical, and philosophical implications. AI & Society has a broad scope and is strongly interdisciplinary. We welcome contributions and participation from researchers and practitioners in a variety of fields including information technologies, humanities, social sciences, arts and sciences. This includes broader societal and cultural impacts, for example on governance, security, sustainability, identity, inclusion, working life, corporate and community welfare, and well-being of people. Co-authored articles from diverse disciplines are encouraged. AI & Society seeks to promote an understanding of the potential, transformative impacts and critical consequences of pervasive technology for societies. Technological innovations, including new sciences such as biotech, nanotech and neuroscience, offer a great potential for societies, but also pose existential risk. Rooted in the human-centred tradition of science and technology, the Journal acts as a catalyst, promoter and facilitator of engagement with diversity of voices and over-the-horizon issues of arts, science, technology and society. AI & Society expects that, in keeping with the ethos of the journal, submissions should provide a substantial and explicit argument on the societal dimension of research, particularly the benefits, impacts and implications for society. This may include factors such as trust, biases, privacy, reliability, responsibility, and competence of AI systems. Such arguments should be validated by critical comment on current research in this area. Curmudgeon Corner will retain its opinionated ethos. The journal is in three parts: a) full length scholarly articles; b) strategic ideas, critical reviews and reflections; c) Student Forum is for emerging researchers and new voices to communicate their ongoing research to the wider academic community, mentored by the Journal Advisory Board; Book Reviews and News; Curmudgeon Corner for the opinionated. Papers in the Original Section may include original papers, which are underpinned by theoretical, methodological, conceptual or philosophical foundations. The Open Forum Section may include strategic ideas, critical reviews and potential implications for society of current research. Network Research Section papers make substantial contributions to theoretical and methodological foundations within societal domains. These will be multi-authored papers that include a summary of the contribution of each author to the paper. Original, Open Forum and Network papers are peer reviewed. The Student Forum Section may include theoretical, methodological, and application orientations of ongoing research including case studies, as well as, contextual action research experiences. Papers in this section are normally single-authored and are also formally reviewed. Curmudgeon Corner is a short opinionated column on trends in technology, arts, science and society, commenting emphatically on issues of concern to the research community and wider society. Normal word length: Original and Network Articles 10k, Open Forum 8k, Student Forum 6k, Curmudgeon 1k. The exception to the co-author limit of Original and Open Forum (4), Network (10), Student (3) and Curmudgeon (2) articles will be considered for their special contributions. Please do not send your submissions by email but use the "Submit manuscript" button. NOTE TO AUTHORS: The Journal expects its authors to include, in their submissions: a) An acknowledgement of the pre-accept/pre-publication versions of their manuscripts on non-commercial and academic sites. b) Images: obtain permissions from the copyright holder/original sources. c) Formal permission from their ethics committees when conducting studies with people.

期刊最新文献

The risky success of a mindless automatism Reflexive ecologies of knowledge in the future of AI & Society Leveraging teleological explanation to support general-purpose AI assessment The machine in the manuscript: editorial dilemmas AI, society, and the shadows of our desires