Concerns on Artificial Intelligence
by Han Trieu, last update: 3/6/02,
Ethics in Technology, Dr. Quinn, Santa Clara University
Ethical issues
Artificial intelligence is still an infant compares to other technologies. It brings about great promises for our future and some even predict that its importance will rival that of the printing press. (Boden) By human nature, many tried to play God: People of all generation and all over the world dreamt of creating a being that is capable of carrying out human actions. A few decades ago, many regarded cloning as ludicrous and simply ignored it. However, we have accomplished it, and who knows what advancement is coming. Artificial intelligence, although nascent, is very popular and as Ray Kurtzweil suggests might be possible within the next thirty year. Kurtzweil further suggests that within fifty years, they might even be smarter than humans. (Fixmer) But is artificial intelligence worth our current investment; should we encourage or prohibit A.I.?
First, let us consider the possibilities of artificial intelligence. Obviously, it will significantly facilitate scientist and researchers, especially those who are involved in researches where human lives are at risk. Scientists no longer have to deal with many of space exploration’s safety issues. Further, space exploration expenses will drop dramatically. For example, NASA and space organizations will no longer have to spend millions of tax dollars on research for space suits. This excess of money can either go to other research projects or back to us, the taxpayers. We can also use these intelligent robots to explore dangerous terrains, such as new planets or dangerous volcanoes.
In a more practical sense, this invention will tremendously improve the standard of living. People would no longer have to deal with “unnecessary chores” and do what they are best at or what they never have time for People will have “greater freedom and greater incentive to concentrate on what is most fully human” (Boden). The development of artificial intelligence, therefore, will benefit many, bringing about the common good.
Artificial intelligence applications are numerous. Schools can buy interactive AI, which will never be bored or angry, to teach. Businesses can also benefit by hiring workers who are never bored, complain, or strike.
However, there are many obvious ethical issues involved when dealing with artificial intelligence. First and most apparent, is that if we allow artificial research to continue, many workers, especially labor workers, will lose their jobs due directly to the development of artificial intelligence. This is absolutely unfair for these workers. What are they going to do? How will they support their families? Many will become homeless or turn to crime. The balance between the poor and the rich will be tipped. There will be few who will enjoy this development, namely the business owners, who have control of the AI and are independent of the lower class labor force. The rest will be in destitute. As we know, if only a small portion of society does “productive” work, the economy will be in chaos. According to Tom Shanks, a doctor for Applied Ethics at Markkula Center, when companies move toward robotics, it is the company’s responsibility to retrain employees who lost their jobs. (Machines) This solution is too quixotic and naive! We cannot expect companies, whose main goal is to make profit, would spend money in retraining discarded workers. Do we expect them to waste money on something that no longer interests them when they already spent much money upgrading to robotic? Shank’s plan seems fair for the workers, but in reality, the companies will rarely comply. A better solution would be to have the government enforcing this rule upon the company, and the government will provide financial aid to do so. This will keep the companies happy, and will encourage many to move to robotics. Consequently, this will also help us progress technologically. The labor workers will be glad to find new jobs, and the economy will be somewhat stable. From this, we can conclude that we need to take precautions and legal actions if we want to incorporate artificial intelligence into society successfully.
On the other hand, if we ban artificial intelligence research, a different group of workers will lose their jobs. The scientists who have spent much time and effort on this project will suddenly find themselves without a stable job. We cannot unjustly tear a dedicated and ambitious scientist away from his research. Further, this will drive the research into secrecy, which would be worse. A.I. will fall into the hands of the few rich and powerful individuals who choose to fund this research secretly. Our government will no longer have control over this new technology, rendering it helpless against aggressors who do have the technology. Therefore, banning artificial intelligence research is both unfair to the scientists, futile and potentially dangerous.
 |
 |
 |
The other stakeholders will be the artificial intelligence systems (or beings) themselves. The design goal of artificial intelligence is to reproduce human actions, which can be summarized into three categories, to think, to sense, and be self-aware. We build them to imitate us and if we are to succeed, what will we call it? Will we still consider them machines, to be slaves to us, or consider them to be autonomous beings since they do have decision-making ability? To further complicate matter, scientists are proposing that they might not even be silicon based. Instead many suggest that a carbon-based approach will be the key to artificial intelligence development. Since it is carbon-based, or biological entities, should we consider them living beings? Can we just treat them like objects, another tool in our toolbox? What if the artificial being misbehave or malfunction, will turning off or destroying one be murder? (Sutcliffe) Would it be ethical to toss them away when we no longer desire their existence? This point is pointed out in Steven Spielberg’s recent film, AI. (Kishner) Two parents who thought their biological child was dead adopted an artificial boy. The boy learned to love the parents just like other children. However, when the biological son was miraculously cured, the parents decided to throw the boy away. The artificial boy spent the rest of his “life” searching for a fairy, who he believed can turn him into a real boy, so he can be reunited with his “mother.” Was the parents’ action justified? After all, the artificial boy was just an object, or was it? Further, if they are considered living beings, then should we also grant them the rights of human beings? “Should they not have freedom of speech, the right to liberty, and the right to own property?” remarked Sutcliffe. What about marriage? Sutcliffe points out a very important fact: In Western civilization, the definition of person has changed several times, first to include women, then blacks and oriental. Will it change again? It is very likely, especially if the artificial being is carbon-based.
 |
 |
 |
If we consider the artificial beings as humans, or is a very close resemblance of human, then should artificial intelligence research be banned because by doing so, we are “playing God?” Just as in the case of cloning or genetic engineering, many would object it simply because they see it as “overstepping due bounds” and “playing with things [we] ought not to.” (Sutcliffe) They see it as contrary to nature of God’s laws and consequently should be forbidden. This argument is not concrete and can be easily refuted: It can be re-interpreted many ways. What is the nature of God’s laws? “Similar assumptions are found in such arguments as: ‘if God had meant us to fly, we would have wings.” (Sutcliffe) If we did not try to fly, we will have missed a great technological improvement, the airplane. Also, if God is omni-science, then we can think of A.I. development as a closer step toward understanding God. Further, if one thinks that artificial intelligence development is “playing God,” then one will also have to reject heart transplant (or any form of transplant) or medicine in general. People who are receiving a heart transplant for example will not survive very long without it. By providing the transplant, we are in giving them second chance at life, giving them another life, “playing God.” We can go further by saying that medicines are also “unnatural” because their main purpose is to cure and prolong life. Should we ban all medicines and take back all the doctors’ licenses? This is outrageous and many of us will answer no to this question. If so, we should then encourage artificial intelligence research.
So far, we assumed that the artificial beings will actually cooperate and obey humans. They are built for human conveniences, and under good hands, they will be very useful and productive in society. However, it can easily fall into the wrong hands, leading to dire consequences. Terrorists can exploit this technology. For example, they would not have to sacrifice their lives crashing planes into important structures, as in the recent September 11 incident.
Moreover, if humans grow too dependent on these artificial beings to do their daily chores, they might not be able to live if the robots are somehow turned off. It would be worse if terrorists can somehow obtain the knowledge of controlling all of them. They can make the robots turn against their masters! Or they can easily form an artificial army: They can mass-produce these artificial soldiers to outnumber and outsmart all the other countries militarily, and take over or destroying the world! This case is extreme, but possible.
Nevertheless, we should not hinder or outlaw A.I. research. Any “good” technology in bad hands will be misused. This does not mean we should not develop them. For example, again taken from the September 11 incident, airplanes can serve as very effective and destructive missiles. This does not mean we should stop developing or improving airplanes. It simply remind us to take precautions when dealing with such technology Similarly, we can argue that we should do research and develop artificial intelligence, and of course doing so with extra precautions.
Artificial intelligence development is comparably minute in the techno-historical spectrum. It is a very interesting field, and many brilliant and ambitious scientists are working diligently on it. It is just a matter of time before someone develops an artificial being. There’s no stopping it! Nonetheless, we should not accept it so hastily because it poses many potential problems. However, by taking precautions (i.e. via legal actions), we can eliminate many unnecessary detrimental consequences of A.I., and enjoy many of its benefits.
Bibliography
Boden, Magaret. “The Age of Intelligent Machines: The Social Impact of Artificial Intelligence.” 1990. KurzweilAI.net 20, Feb. 2002. <http://www.kurzweilai.net/articles/art0162.html>.
Fixmer, Rob. “The Soul of the Next New Machine: Humans.” Arts and Ideas 5, Nov 1999 <http://cseserv.engr.scu.edu/NQuinn/ENGR019_301Winter2002/HWBCCCU.htm >.
Kishner, Jeffrey. “Steven Spielberg’s AI.” Astrology at the Movies. 5, Mar. 2002. <http://www.astrologyatthemovies.com/ai.html>.
“Machines and man: ethics and robotics in the 21st century.” The Tech Museum 20, Feb. 2002. <http://www.thetech.org/robotics/ethics/>.
Sutcliffe, Richard. “Issues in Artificial Intelligence.” 2/22/02 <http://www.arjay.bc.ca/EthTech/Text/Ch6/Ch6.4.html#A.I Issues>.