Cultivating Dignity in Intelligent Systems

IF 0.6 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Philosophies Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.3390/philosophies9020046
Adeniyi Fasoro
{"title":"Cultivating Dignity in Intelligent Systems","authors":"Adeniyi Fasoro","doi":"10.3390/philosophies9020046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As artificial intelligence (AI) integrates across social domains, prevailing technical paradigms often overlook human relational needs vital for cooperative resilience. Alternative pathways consciously supporting dignity and wisdom warrant consideration. Integrating seminal insights from virtue and care ethics, this article delineates the following four cardinal design principles prioritizing communal health: (1) affirming the sanctity of life; (2) nurturing healthy attachment; (3) facilitating communal wholeness; and (4) safeguarding societal resilience. Grounding my analysis in the rich traditions of moral philosophy, I argue that these principles scaffold sustainable innovation trajectories that consciously center shared welfare advancement over detached technical capabilities or efficiency benchmarks alone. Elucidating connections with pioneering initiatives demonstrates fragments of this vision taking embryonic shape, yet pervasive adoption remains largely aspirational to date. Fulfilling dignity-based artificial intelligence demands ongoing collective commitment beyond firms’ profit motives or governance proceduralism. My conclusions urge technology policies and priorities directed toward empowering the vulnerability of people rather than controlling the optimization of systems.","PeriodicalId":31446,"journal":{"name":"Philosophies","volume":"3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies9020046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) integrates across social domains, prevailing technical paradigms often overlook human relational needs vital for cooperative resilience. Alternative pathways consciously supporting dignity and wisdom warrant consideration. Integrating seminal insights from virtue and care ethics, this article delineates the following four cardinal design principles prioritizing communal health: (1) affirming the sanctity of life; (2) nurturing healthy attachment; (3) facilitating communal wholeness; and (4) safeguarding societal resilience. Grounding my analysis in the rich traditions of moral philosophy, I argue that these principles scaffold sustainable innovation trajectories that consciously center shared welfare advancement over detached technical capabilities or efficiency benchmarks alone. Elucidating connections with pioneering initiatives demonstrates fragments of this vision taking embryonic shape, yet pervasive adoption remains largely aspirational to date. Fulfilling dignity-based artificial intelligence demands ongoing collective commitment beyond firms’ profit motives or governance proceduralism. My conclusions urge technology policies and priorities directed toward empowering the vulnerability of people rather than controlling the optimization of systems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在智能系统中培养尊严
随着人工智能(AI)跨社会领域的整合,主流的技术范式往往忽视了对合作复原力至关重要的人类关系需求。有意识地支持尊严和智慧的其他途径值得考虑。本文综合了美德与关爱伦理学的开创性见解,阐述了以下四项优先考虑社区健康的基本设计原则:(1)肯定生命的神圣性;(2)培养健康的依恋关系;(3)促进社区的整体性;以及(4)保障社会的复原力。我的分析立足于丰富的道德哲学传统,我认为,这些原则为可持续创新轨迹提供了支架,这些轨迹有意识地将共同福利进步放在中心位置,而不仅仅是脱离技术能力或效率基准。通过阐明与先驱性倡议的联系,我们可以看到这一愿景已初具雏形,但迄今为止,普遍采用这一愿景在很大程度上仍是奢望。实现基于尊严的人工智能需要持续的集体承诺,而不是企业的利润动机或治理程序主义。我的结论敦促制定技术政策和优先事项,以增强人们的脆弱性,而不是控制优化系统。
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
Philosophies
Philosophies Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
122
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Horror as Film Philosophy Poetic Judgement in Everyday Speech Didier Eribon vs. ‘The People’—A Critique of Chantal Mouffe’s Left Populism Decolonial Philosophies and Complex Communication as Praxis Belarus’s Sound Body
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1