The Moral Status of AGI-enabled Robots

Q3 Arts and Humanities Symposion Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5840/symposion20231014
Mubarak Hussain
{"title":"The Moral Status of AGI-enabled Robots","authors":"Mubarak Hussain","doi":"10.5840/symposion20231014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For a long time, researchers of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and futurists have hypothesized that the developed Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) systems can execute intellectual and behavioral tasks similar to human beings. However, there are two possible concerns regarding the emergence of AGI systems and their moral status, namely: 1) is it possible to grant moral status to the AGI-enabled robots similar to humans? 2) if it is (im)possible, then under what conditions do such robots (fail to) achieve moral status similar to humans? To examine the possibilities, the present study puts forward a functionality argument, which claims that if a human being and an AGI-enabled robot have similar functionality, but different creative processes, they may have similar moral status. Furthermore, the functionality argument asserts that an entity’s (a human being or an AGI-enabled robot) creation/production from carbon or silicon or its brain’s utilization of neurotransmitters or semiconductors does not carry any significance. Rather, if both entities have similar functionality, they may have similar moral status, which implies that the AGI-enabled robot may achieve human-like moral status if it performs human-like functions.","PeriodicalId":37705,"journal":{"name":"Symposion","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Symposion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/symposion20231014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For a long time, researchers of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and futurists have hypothesized that the developed Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) systems can execute intellectual and behavioral tasks similar to human beings. However, there are two possible concerns regarding the emergence of AGI systems and their moral status, namely: 1) is it possible to grant moral status to the AGI-enabled robots similar to humans? 2) if it is (im)possible, then under what conditions do such robots (fail to) achieve moral status similar to humans? To examine the possibilities, the present study puts forward a functionality argument, which claims that if a human being and an AGI-enabled robot have similar functionality, but different creative processes, they may have similar moral status. Furthermore, the functionality argument asserts that an entity’s (a human being or an AGI-enabled robot) creation/production from carbon or silicon or its brain’s utilization of neurotransmitters or semiconductors does not carry any significance. Rather, if both entities have similar functionality, they may have similar moral status, which implies that the AGI-enabled robot may achieve human-like moral status if it performs human-like functions.
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
agi机器人的道德地位
长期以来,人工智能(AI)研究人员和未来学家一直假设,开发出的通用人工智能(AGI)系统可以执行类似于人类的智力和行为任务。然而,关于人工智能系统的出现及其道德地位,有两个可能的问题,即:1)是否有可能赋予与人类类似的人工智能机器人道德地位?2)如果可能(不可能),那么在什么条件下,这些机器人(不能)达到与人类相似的道德地位?为了检验这种可能性,本研究提出了一个功能性论点,该论点声称,如果人类和具有agi功能的机器人具有相似的功能,但不同的创造过程,他们可能具有相似的道德地位。此外,功能性论点断言,一个实体(人类或agi机器人)由碳或硅创造/生产,或其大脑对神经递质或半导体的利用没有任何意义。相反,如果两个实体具有相似的功能,它们可能具有相似的道德地位,这意味着如果具有agi功能的机器人执行类似人类的功能,则可能达到类似人类的道德地位。
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
Symposion
Symposion Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Symposion was published for the first time in 2003, as Symposion – Revistă de științe socio-umane (Symposion – A Journal of Humanities), with the purpose of providing a supportive space for academic communication, dialogue, and debate, both intra and interdisciplinary, for philosophical humanities and social and political sciences. Symposion: Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences shares essentially the same purpose. Its main aim is to promote and provide open access to peer-reviewed, high quality contributions (articles, discussion notes, review essays or book reviews) in philosophy, other humanities, and social and political sciences connected with philosophy.
期刊最新文献
The Buried Promise of Sections 74 and 75 of Chapter V of Division Two of Heidegger’s Being and Time (1927) in light of New Testament Christianity Turing Algorithms in Art Reading Nehamas’s Nietzsche Truth about Artifacts The Moral Status of AGI-enabled Robots
×
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