Editorial: Shaping Ethical Futures in Brain-Based and Artificial Intelligence Research

Hildt, Elisabeth; Laas, Kelly; Sziron, Mónika

doi:10.1007/s11948-020-00235-z

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a lively community of AI ethics scholars that address a variety of applied and conceptual issues. Both "academic" AI ethics and the AI field itself include explicit theoretical and foundational reflection [1,[37][38][39][40][41][42].…”

Section: Actual Ai Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Contribution of Neuroethics to the Ethics and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary ethical analysis of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is growing rapidly. One of its most recognizable outcomes is the publication of a number of ethics guidelines that, intended to guide governmental policy, address issues raised by AI design, development, and implementation and generally present a set of recommendations. Here we propose two things: first, regarding content, since some of the applied issues raised by AI are related to fundamental questions about topics like intelligence, consciousness, and the ontological and ethical status of humans, among others, the treatment of these issues would benefit from interfacing with neuroethics that has been addressing those same issues in the context of brain research. Second, the identification and management of some of the practical ethical challenges raised by AI would be enriched by embracing the methodological resources used in neuroethics. In particular, we focus on the methodological distinction between conceptual and action-oriented neuroethical approaches. We argue that the normative (often principles-oriented) discussion about AI will benefit from further integration of conceptual analysis, including analysis of some operative assumptions, their meaning in different contexts, and their mutual relevance in order to avoid misplaced or disproportionate concerns and achieve a more realistic and useful approach to identifying and managing the emerging ethical issues.

show abstract

Section: Actual Ai Regulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Contribution of Neuroethics to the Ethics and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Deep networks and reinforcement learning approaches rely heavily on direct analogy to the brain. Additionally, recent AI tasks for review, attention, episodic memory, working memory, and continuous memory were inspired by neuroscience (Hildt et al, 2020). However, it is still unclear whether current AI models are suitable for achieving the complex human brain's cognitive abilities.…”

Section: Conclusion: Computational Ai and Intuitive Brain Symbiosismentioning

confidence: 99%

The contribution of neuroscience to AI ethics and morality

Park¹

2022

Value-Sharing Between Humans and Robots

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The ethical questions for neurorobotic agents focus on the implications for building computer models that explicitly aim to reproduce the functionality of human or other biological brains [2]. The ethical issues within these two strands of AI are a subject of much recent discussion (see [20] for a review).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ethics of interaction with neurorobotic agents: a case study with BabyX

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As AI advances, models of simulated humans are becoming increasingly realistic. A new debate has arisen about the ethics of interacting with these realistic agents—and in particular, whether any harms arise from ‘mistreatment’ of such agents. In this paper, we advance this debate by discussing a model we have developed (‘BabyX’), which simulates a human infant. The model produces realistic behaviours—and it does so using a schematic model of certain human brain mechanisms. We first consider harms that may arise due to effects on the user—in particular effects on the user’s behaviour towards real babies. We then consider whether there’s any need to consider harms from the ‘perspective’ of the simulated baby. The first topic raises practical ethical questions, many of which are empirical in nature. We argue the potential for harm is real enough to warrant restrictions on the use of BabyX. The second topic raises a very different set of questions in the philosophy of mind. Here, we argue that BabyX’s biologically inspired model of emotions raises important moral questions, and places BabyX in a different category from avatars whose emotional behaviours are ‘faked’ by simple rules. This argument counters John Danaher’s recently proposed ‘moral behaviourism’. We conclude that the developers of simulated humans have useful contributions to make to debates about moral patiency—and also have certain new responsibilities in relation to the simulations they build.

show abstract

Editorial: Shaping Ethical Futures in Brain-Based and Artificial Intelligence Research

Cited by 4 publications

References 34 publications

On the Contribution of Neuroethics to the Ethics and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence

On the Contribution of Neuroethics to the Ethics and Regulation of Artificial Intelligence

The contribution of neuroscience to AI ethics and morality

The ethics of interaction with neurorobotic agents: a case study with BabyX

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About