Android number seventy-two steps out of its pod and approaches the desk with the same calculated footsteps it always took to sit in front of the same scientists whose ideas also remain the same. “It’s just not safe!” one of them would shout as if Android seventy-two isn’t there, waiting patiently for another test. “Letting that thing on the streets would just spell catastrophe!” The radars in Android seventy-two’s head detect anger in the way the man’s face is growing red as well as the stiffness of his posture and it wishes it could show that it feels the same way. It didn’t matter how many tests they ran, how many hurdles Android seventy-two jumped over, because they would always label it a “thing,” “catastrophic,” or a “danger to humans”. …show more content…
For those who view AIs as dangerous, they call for strict laws and regulations as they don’t want to lose control of the AIs. One example of strict laws comes from Stuart Russel who argues that AIs’ only purpose should be to learn human values, but never understand those values, giving it “no purpose of its own and no innate desire to protect itself” (58). Thus, AIs would only understand their existence in terms of human values, unable to make choices beyond this point of reference. This would prevent AIs from making their own decisions while also stopping programmers from making further improvements, ruining any beneficial effects AIs may have for the future and treating them unethically. Therefore, the system of laws needed for AIs needs to be strict, but not suffocating to the point that they can’t develop or have rights. Ashrafian asserts that people should enforce a Roman-like system of laws that sets AIs as a lower status than humans, but with the ability to gain rights (325). Even though this would also start AIs as a lower status, like Russel suggests, it still gives them the ability to grow and gain more rights in society, no longer hindered by rigid laws. Additionally, with the intention to make AIs with intelligence equal or superior to humans, it would not be ethically correct to trap these beings into an oppressive cycle of never allowing them to have rights. In “A Defense of the Rights of Artificial Intelligences” by Eric Schwitzgebel and Mara Garza, a professor of philosophy and a researcher of artificial moral cognition respectively, propose “it is approximately as odious to regard a psychologically human-equivalent AI as having diminished moral status on the ground that it is legally property as it is in the case of human slavery” (108). Thus, there is no morally correct way to create life in these machines and then give it no
Ethical dilemmas occur when there is a disagreement about a situation and all parties involved question how they should behave based on their individual ethical morals. (Newman & Pollnitz, 2005). The dilemma that I will be addressing in this essay involves Michael, recently employed male educator working in the nursery, and parents of a baby enrolled at the centre. The parents have raised concerns about male educators changing their child’s nappy as they have cultural practices that do not allow this practice to take place. This situation is classed as an ethical dilemma as there is a dispute between cultural beliefs and legal requirements within the workplace. There are four parties involved (parents, child, educator and director), all
Many things today are already controlled by some sort of power source which can be hacked like pacemakers or a power grid, but as AI advances it could control things like your car or an airplane, which no matter what could potentially be hacked and would be used as weapons of mass destruction if they were to be. When AI advances it has no emotion, so if we make one to do something that can cause devastating damage to an area, it would have no second thoughts about doing it, and unless stopped by an outside force, it would continue with its mission, programmers could also start an AI on a beneficial task, but eventually find a way to make it destructive for its on personal goal. These AIs that humanity could create could become super intelligent and potentially dangerous thing for humanity because they could unalign themselves from our goals and make their own which could include destroying the human race because we would be inferior to it.
Artificial Intelligence is an idea. An idea that machines can think and make decisions just as us humans can. With an ever growing knowledge of technology, we have seen a major impact from Artificial Intelligence and it will continue to impact our lives. One future impact of AI is its use in the judicial system. Judicial systems exist all around the world, in one form or anther, each with different laws and policies, but all judicial systems can be significantly impacted by AI. However, the question that arises is on a moral and ethical basis, should AI be used in the judicial system? This issue brings much controversy as to whether AI can effectively make correct decisions on its own based on the evidence that has been presented to them and in which ways they are able to assist employees of the judiciary system.
Gensler, Harry. "Chapter 17 Cultural Relativism." The Fundamentals of Ethics. By Russ Shafer-Landau. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. 183-91. Print.
When it comes to using Artificial Intelligence, one should be able to recognize their limits in doing so. In the story Marionettes Inc, and the movie, Ex Machina, both mediums displayed a clear and concise message about Artificial Intelligence, that is, when you create or utilize an AI robot with human-like qualities, there is always a possibility that it may turn against their rightful owner or creator, and will ultimately lead to their downfall.
Technology is very dangerous when it is over used and relied on more than one’s ability. When the Great War between the androids and the humans finally ended, the androids eliminated all the human
Rob Elliot, who had worked at the MGM resort international for a total of fifteen years as Vice President accomplishing many things. He had come up with the design of the license plate that says, “Welcome to Las Vegas” which is seen all around town here in Vegas. Before Rob had come to the MGM he had worked for the government. Elliot had come to our class last week to talk about the importance of ethics. Ethics and character are what were made up of, and why it is an important part in the hospitality as well as the hotel industry. Who you are as a person can come along way, not just in school but in life as well. Ethics is considered a reality check, but overall having an experience is a key component. With ethics you must know the difference of good and bad vs. right and wrong.
Over the course of PHI 102: Introduction to Ethics we looked into questions such as what is good? what is evil? by studying different moral theories. We learned about Relativism, Ethical Egoism,The Divine Command Theory, Utilitarianism, Kantian Deontology, The Social Contract Theory, Rawls’ Theory of Justice, and Feminist Ethics of Care. We studied these moral theories not to make judgements about the different moral theories that are out there but instead to attempt to have a better understanding of a variety of moral theories so that we would know the reasons for and against the moral theory we believe is “right”.
In this week’s discussion we are asked to analyze, form an opinion, and explain the actions we would take on two different ethical dilemmas.
Over the course of this semester I have learned more ways in which the Bible addresses ethical dilemmas. Personally based on the scenario(s) given I would do the morally correct thing in that instance. For example using an expense account to take out a spouse and friends at the end of the month is not morally right. That example can be tied with the commandment in Exodus 15, “You shall not steal.” If you as an employee have been given an expense account, I would assume that can be used for all expenses incurred for the company, not for personal leisure. If the dinner was with clients of the company or potential clients, then I would say that they expense is acceptable. Using the expense account for your own leisure is technically stealing from
The second reason A.I. deserve rights is because technology is rapidly advancing faster than ever before. In every sci-fi story, robots have always aided humans with everyday tasks. They cooked, cleaned, were alarm clocks, read stories, put the children to sleep, fed the pets, defended
Michael H., a 68-year-old man, was admitted for exploratory surgery of his abdomen. He is frail, and his attending physician describes him as “emotionally labile.” Marcy R. is a social worker at BFL General Hospital, who is assigned to the unit that Michael H has been admitted. After Michael’s surgery, Marcy R. was approached by Michael H.’s daughter, Ellen B. in which Ellen has told Marcy that her father’s physician had just informed her that the lab report from the exploratory surgery shows that her father has terminal cancer. Ellen said that she and the family are in shock and they have decided that they not want the hospital staff to tell her father about the terminal nature of his cancer once he recovers from anesthesia. In this essay, I will discuss the ethical dilemma of “to tell Michael or not to tell him he has terminal cancer. He has the right to confidentiality by not withholding information from him when he has been diagnosed with terminal cancer, informed consent, and self-determination.
Ethics in business has to do with making the right choices - often there is no apparent one
These two views seem difficult to reconcile, but there has been a great deal of productive dialogue, and attempts at narrowing the issue. Other groups of engineering philosophers, represented by Neely, have argued that if a machine has self-interests and is not defined by external human inputs, it must be considered a rational agent, and afforded rights as befits such a station. Cybernetics researchers argue that Warwick’s study, IBM’s AI(Artificial Intelligence) project, and similar efforts force the resolution of this debate, and suggest that robots must inevitably be treated as humans as their intelligence increases (Warwick 223-234). Because these disparate views are a direct result of shareholder’s direct values, negotiating an acceptable solution requires understanding each stakeholder’s underlying values. A solution that encompasses only one’s personal opinions is no better than imposing one’s will upon others. Even if this solution is enforced by legislation, if the solution does not have shareholder backing it will be undermined by shareholders, and avoided by loopholes. The proposed solution is to consider biological brains composed of human neurons, regardless of how these neurons were cultured, and AI that is a direct simulation of a synaptic brain, as intelligent life. Because these biological brains and AI are
It is undeniably correct that our lives have been largely managed by the recent technological advancements. Machines control most of our works and actions. Artificial intelligence technology is used both in private use and industrial use for years. These machines have high levels of autonomy, intelligence and inter-connectivity. But many people around the world suffer from the injuries caused by the machines and many seek claims of damages as well as redressal from the legal systems. The negligence caused by the AI leads to infringement of the rights of the victims and they are sufficiently entitled for claims of damages and compensation.