Questioning the Role of Moral AI as an Adviser within the Framework of Trustworthiness Ethics

IF 0.1 N/A PHILOSOPHY Filosofiya-Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-12-06 DOI:10.53656/phil2021-04-07
Silviya Serafimova
{"title":"Questioning the Role of Moral AI as an Adviser within the Framework of Trustworthiness Ethics","authors":"Silviya Serafimova","doi":"10.53656/phil2021-04-07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main objective of this article is to demonstrate why despite the growing interest in justifying AI’s trustworthiness, one can argue for AI’s reliability. By analyzing why trustworthiness ethics in Nickel’s sense provides some wellgrounded hints for rethinking the rational, affective and normative accounts of trust in respect to AI, I examine some concerns about the trustworthiness of Savulescu and Maslen’s model of moral AI as an adviser. Specifically, I tackle one of its exemplifications regarding Klincewicz’s hypothetical scenario of John which is refracted through the lens of the HLEG’s fifth requirement of trustworthy artificial intelligence (TAI), namely, that of Diversity, non-discrimination and fairness.","PeriodicalId":53786,"journal":{"name":"Filosofiya-Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofiya-Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53656/phil2021-04-07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The main objective of this article is to demonstrate why despite the growing interest in justifying AI’s trustworthiness, one can argue for AI’s reliability. By analyzing why trustworthiness ethics in Nickel’s sense provides some wellgrounded hints for rethinking the rational, affective and normative accounts of trust in respect to AI, I examine some concerns about the trustworthiness of Savulescu and Maslen’s model of moral AI as an adviser. Specifically, I tackle one of its exemplifications regarding Klincewicz’s hypothetical scenario of John which is refracted through the lens of the HLEG’s fifth requirement of trustworthy artificial intelligence (TAI), namely, that of Diversity, non-discrimination and fairness.
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
在诚信伦理框架下质疑道德人工智能作为顾问的作用
本文的主要目的是证明为什么尽管人们对证明人工智能的可信度越来越感兴趣,但人们可以为人工智能的可靠性争论。通过分析为什么尼克尔意义上的诚信伦理为重新思考人工智能方面的理性、情感和规范的信任账户提供了一些有根据的暗示,我研究了萨乌列斯库和马伦作为顾问的道德人工智能模型的可信度。具体来说,我处理了其中一个关于Klincewicz关于John的假设场景的例子,该场景通过HLEG对可信赖人工智能(TAI)的第五个要求(即多样性,非歧视和公平)的镜头折射出来。
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
Filosofiya-Philosophy
Filosofiya-Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊最新文献
Transcendental Constitution of World and Ego Observations on Heidegger’s Perception of Kant Two Theoretical Symposia in Bulgaria Dedicated to the 300th Anniversary of the Birth of Immanuel Kant Kant’s Aesthetics in the Perspective of Sensory Studies Theory of Cognition and Practical Interest in Kant: on the Distinction Between Appearance and Thing in Itslef Virtualistic Transcendentalism as a Concept of Systematic Critical Metaphysics. The Pentalogy of Valentin Kanawrow
×
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