The complexities of AI sentience
Storyboard Text
- The Western Philosophers
- Can you believe that there is discourse about the sentience of AI?
- It is ludicrous! Philosophy is getting too philosophical!
- The AI Robots
- Can you believe the humans think our sentience and consciousness is debatable?
- That is ludicrous! They are so stuck in their human ways of thinking!
- I totally agree with you! The line of consciousness has to be drawn somewhere somehow, and this is it! Rationality!
- As a Western Philosopher, I think that humans are rational animals (Goffi et al., 2022).
- Although many Western Philosophers believe that rationality is the fundamental fixture of consciousness. I disagree!
- I think you are correct! Especially because rationality, as the crux of sentience has historically been used to justify the oppression of women, people of colour, and other inferior groups (Goffi et al., 2022).
- You know, Bostrom and Yudkowsky assert that “if two beings have the same functionality and consciousness experience, and differ only in how they came into existence, then they have the same moral status” (Goffi et al., 2022).
- I disagree with Bostrom and Yudkowsky. If we apply the same moral status to AI and Robots, where do we draw the line of what/who we must treat ethically?
- I think that if the humans apply the same moral status to us, AI, they will be forced to treat us ethically, and as we have seen with animal ethics, there is a ton of resistance to granting non-humans moral status for this very same reason.
- You present a very good point. The Arwaté, a group Indigenous to Brazil, considers consciousness the ability to respond to communication cues from others (Goffi et al., 2022).
- Well in terms of sentience, I think that it should be determined by one's ability to experience suffering.
- As a modern Western philosopher, I think that sentience is the capacity to experience feelings and sensations (Goffi et al., 2022).
- True, but the humans who have disproportionate power in Western society will define sentience in a way that still justifies the subordination of non-human animals and AI.
- I think that animals and plants - in particular - can be sentient in an anti-anthropocentric view.
- I think, that sentience should be the ground on which moral status is granted.
- Ouch! My piping hot coffee spilled on me! It hurts! I am suffering!
- Well, at least we know you are sentient!*evil chuckle*
- Many modern Western philosophers argue that because plants, and not AI, do not FEEL pain, in a human way, that they do not deserve the same status of sentience.
- Well, I think we should look at examples in nature of how plants can suffer, outside of the human form of suffering.
- What you mean?
- Many non-Western philosophies argue for more widespread granting of moral status to non-human animals and plants. But, personally, I do not think that this is a good idea, because there is no line. At a certain point, just based on the practical implications of granting moral status and what that means socially/legally, it is too complex.
- I agree. At a certain point, not all life is equal and deserving of equal treatment and moral protections and ethical treatment protocols.
- Remember when we were here *an undisclosed* time ago, and the sun was out?
- Well, the plant over there, had leaves, and was responding positively. Now, it is cloudy and it is suffering ! (Kruse et al., 2019).
- Aha! I totally understand what you are saying. Plants do suffer, but not in the same way as humans, because they are inherently different organisms.
- Yes!
- Largely, based on AI behaviour, although it may appear as them being sentient (based on actions) we do not know if this is authentic or mimicked thought processes.
- Yes. For this very reason, we cannot grant them moral status. It would be too much work/effort to apply ethical treatment standards for beings that we do not think are sentient.
- In the same way that anti-anthropocentric principles could be used to grant sentience to plants for suffering , AI should be granted the same moral status on these grounds.
- Another principle that Western humans use to justify AI not being sentient beings regards thinking.
- Philosopher John Searle argues that external behavior and actions cannot be used as a factor in determining one’s ability to think, because using this, it is unknown whether or not the AI is “actually” thinking or “mimicing” thinking (Goffi et al., 2022).
- Yes! I totally agree.
- Great.
- I completely agree.
- That it is why these discussions of AI sentience must be continued, anti-anthropocentric, de-colonized, and critical.
- I agree. If they do not grant us moral status, then they can exploit us without restriction, while simultaneously perpetuating the belief that non-western philosophies of life are inferior (Kruse et al., 2019).
- I think that capitalism is the reason why much of Western society is reluctant to apply moral status to non-human beings.
- I completely agree.
Over 30 Million Storyboards Created
No Downloads, No Credit Card, and No Login Needed to Try!
