Shall we accept AI robots to be part of our society?
1. AI robot as Pastor or Priest?
2. AI robot as spouse or soulmate?
3. AI robot as teacher or instructor to your children?
4. AI robot as housemaid and baby sitter?
5. AI robot to replace human friends?
6. AI robot as bodyguard equipped with firearm to protect you, so that it may kill a human who try to take away your life?
7. AI robot to make decisions on behalf of you in many things that you are "lazy" to work on them.
The question is interesting. But, it ignores all sorts of core questions about
the algorithms of Artificial Intelligence, and the nature of conceptual
moral-ethical systems (and how to APPLY them to actual instances in
the lives of human beings).
Forgive me, if I reference or quote copyrighted material...
---------- ----------
Some of the relevant questions that Christians SHOULD BE seriously
discussing are...
1. Current AI applications that are based on "machine learning" or "neural
nets" are THE WEAKEST FORM OF AI ALGORITHMS, according to
Computer Science.
2. Current AI algorithms are almost ALL "sub-logical", which means that
the pathways that the algorithm followed to get an answer, are not associated
with meanings that human beings recognize. Which means, that the answers
that most AI algorithms would arrive at CANNOT BE EXPLAINED OR
JUSTIFIED in human language. Would you accept an answer from a counsellor,
who could not explain or justify why they think their answer is correct? Can
an AI even claim, "God showed me this answer through an act of direct
revelation"???
3 The underlying problem with conceptual moral-ethical codes (conceptual,
because they are NOT comprehensive lists of instances that fall into the
categories of what is forbidden, or what is required), is that it is impossible
to list all INSTANCES of actions to which a moral-ethical code applies.
This means that ANALOGIES AND METAPHORS must be used, in order to
decide whether or not a specific action, is addressed by a moral-ethical code.
For some reason, Christians are not conscious of this HUGE challenge, of
translating a conceptual ME system, to apply to ACTUAL INSTANCES of human
behavior. (In our fair rule of law in America, this is handled by judges
establishing "precedents". But this always leaves open the need to possibly
establish new precedents, to augment the accepted ones.)
---------- ----------
I quote some copyrighted material, dealing with analogies and metaphors (point 3, above).
"Analogies and Metaphors
Analogies are comparisons between things that are the same. Metaphors are comparisons that involve things that are different.
“O Nature and O soul of man! how far beyond all utterances are your linked analogies! not the smallest atom stirs or lives in matter, but has its cunning duplicate in mind.” [Moby Dick, 2015 Barnes and Noble, Northwestern University Press, 312]
“In order to reach a conclusion based on analogy, it is only necessary that the deduction flow out of the shared properties.” [Darwin’s Black Box, 218]
“the human concept of ‘analogy’ turns out to be no less fuzzy and indefinite than any other.” [Alignment, 317]
(I don’t agree with this quote, but many technical people, who are not very good with human language, tend to think that human language is fuzzy and imprecise.)
William Dembski asserts that, instead of being anthropomorphisms, many “metaphors” that we use to describe God are actually theomorphisms. For example, God being our Father is not an anthropomorphism. Rather, our concept of human fathers is a theomorphism of the fatherhood of God. [The End of Christianity, 102]
“The guiding metaphors of the Christian faith are non-negotiable. We need these metaphors to understand God aright. To change these metaphors is, in fact, to deny God.” [The End of Christianity, 103]
My goal is not to offend people, but if I have to, to do it “without favoritism or partiality.”
Aristotle was concerned not only with the proper form of logical propositions and proofs, but with ensuring that propositions were TRUE. For Christians, this means that the propositions we use must be in touch with our shared reality.
Formal logic is a technical analysis calculus (language/system) — it is not literature. So how are we to think carefully about all the forms of literature that exist in the Bible, or in the rest of our shared reality?
Insight
Analogy and metaphor are NOT formal logical structures.
Therefore, the authority of an analogy or a metaphor cannot be determined by formal
logic theory." [Christian Logic, Stephen Wuest, 2024, 403-404]
---------- ----------
You can speculate all you want, about popular concepts of Artificial
Intelligence. BUT, you must deal with the current design realities of
AI products. And there are HUGE challenges, before a Christian
moral-ethical model could be integrated into AI algorithms.
This is why it is morally objectionable, that the AI software companies
are releasing AI products, WITHOUT ANY MORAL-ETHICAL MODEL.
SOURCES
[Alignment] The Alignment Problem: Machine Learning and Human Values, Brian Christian,
W.W. Norton and Company, 2020.
[Christian Logic]. Christian Logic, Stephen Wuest, Christian Faith Publishing, 2024.
[Darwin’s Black Box] Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution,
Michael J. Behe, The Free Press, 1996.
[The End of Christianity] The End of Christianity: Finding a Good God in an Evil World,
William A. Dembski, B&H Publishing Group, 2009.
[Moby Dick]. The classic reprint available in Barnes and Noble....
