AI Moral Enhancement: Upgrading the Socio-Technical System of Moral Engagement

Abstract

Several proposals for moral enhancement would use AI to augment (auxiliary enhancement) or even supplant (exhaustive enhancement) human moral reasoning or judgment. Exhaustive enhancement proposals conceive AI as some self-contained oracle whose superiority to our own moral abilities is manifest in its ability to reliably deliver the ‘right’ answers to all our moral problems. We think this is a mistaken way to frame the project, as it presumes that we already know many things that we are still in the process of working out, and reflecting on this fact reveals challenges even for auxiliary proposals that eschew the oracular approach. We argue there is nonetheless a substantial role that ‘AI mentors’ could play in our moral education and training. Expanding on the idea of an AI Socratic Interlocutor, we propose a modular system of multiple AI interlocutors with their own distinct points of view reflecting their training in a diversity of concrete wisdom traditions. This approach minimizes any risk of moral disengagement, while the existence of multiple modules from a diversity of traditions ensures pluralism is preserved. We conclude with reflections on how all this relates to the broader notion of moral transcendence implicated in the project of AI moral enhancement, contending it is precisely the whole concrete socio-technical system of moral engagement that we need to model if we are to pursue moral enhancement.

AI-assisted ethics? considerations of AI simulation for the ethical assessment and design of assistive technologies

“…We think that the ‘values’ relevant for machine ethics are far from being sufficiently defined and hinge on theoretical backgrounds, often of conflicting philosophical stances (see also Volkman and Gabriels, 2023 ). Consider the confusion between “autonomy” as moral self-determination, reflective self-governance or freedom of choice and “automation” understood as “absence of human control”, but often seen as model for “autonomous decision of a machine”.…”

“…282). Volkman and Gabriels (2023) build on this idea of ‘AI mentors’ but stress the need for a ‘total’ socio-technical system “to operate through a diversity of perspectives challenging one another” ( p . 10).…”

“…By a Socratic technique, the machine helps the human agent to learn to reason ethically, but the aim is not to delegate decisions to the technical system or to train a system to be compatible with particular values (p. 282). Volkman and Gabriels (2023) build on this idea of 'AI mentors' but stress the need for a 'total' socio-technical system "to operate through a diversity of perspectives challenging one another" (p. 10). Their general idea of support that strives for more complexity and considers many perspectives shows analogies with our still more specific approach.…”

From silicon to solutions: AI's impending impact on research and discovery

“…wrong? ; for two separate thought-provoking reads, see, e.g., Sison and Redín, 2023;Volkman and Gabriels, 2023). Granting agencies play a pivotal role in shaping the research landscape by allocating funds to projects with the potential for significant contributions to knowledge and societal advancement.…”

From Silicon to Solutions: AI's Impending Impact on Research and Discovery

“…What type of philosophical frameworks should guide such decisions (e.g., a utilitarian view that emphasizes the greatest gains for the public in spite of the costs to a few versus a Kantian view of what acts themselves are right versus wrong? ; for two separate thought-provoking reads, see, e.g., Sison and Redín, 2023;Volkman and Gabriels, 2023). Granting agencies play a pivotal role in shaping the research landscape by allocating funds to projects with the potential for significant contributions to knowledge and societal advancement.…”