Social choice ethics in artificial intelligence

A major approach to the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) is to use social choice, in which the AI is designed to act according to the aggregate views of society. This is found in the AI ethics of “coherent extrapolated volition” and “bottom–up ethics”. This paper shows that the normative basis of AI social choice ethics is weak due to the fact that there is no one single aggregate ethical view of society. Instead, the design of social choice AI faces three sets of decisions: standing, concerning whose ethics views are included; measurement, concerning how their views are identified; and aggregation, concerning how individual views are combined to a single view that will guide AI behavior. These decisions must be made up front in the initial AI design—designers cannot “let the AI figure it out”. Each set of decisions poses difficult ethical dilemmas with major consequences for AI behavior, with some decision options yielding pathological or even catastrophic results. Furthermore, non-social choice ethics face similar issues, such as whether to count future generations or the AI itself. These issues can be more important than the question of whether or not to use social choice ethics. Attention should focus on these issues, not on social choice.

[1]  Daniel Cattaert,et al.  Anxiety-like behavior in crayfish is controlled by serotonin , 2014, Science.

[2]  Lawrence G. Sager Handbook of Computational Social Choice , 2015 .

[3]  Daniel Balliet,et al.  Ingroup favoritism in cooperation: a meta-analysis. , 2014, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  Cass Robert Sunstein,et al.  Standing for Animals (with Notes on Animal Rights) A Tribute to Kenneth L. Karst , 2000 .

[5]  John C. Harsanyi,et al.  Utilities, preferences, and substantive goods , 1996 .

[6]  Nancy Tuana,et al.  The Role of the National Science Foundation Broader Impacts Criterion in Enhancing Research Ethics Pedagogy , 2009 .

[7]  Wlodek Rabinowicz,et al.  The Value of Existence , 2015 .

[8]  Baron,et al.  Protected Values and Omission Bias. , 1999, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[9]  Gustaf Arrhenius,et al.  The Impossibility of a Satisfactory Population Ethics , 2011 .

[10]  Clive D. L. Wynne,et al.  Can fish really feel pain , 2014 .

[11]  Wendell Wallach,et al.  Machine morality: bottom-up and top-down approaches for modelling human moral faculties , 2008, AI & SOCIETY.

[12]  Luke Muehlhauser,et al.  The Singularity and Machine Ethics , 2012 .

[13]  Nicholas C. Fernandez,et al.  To Practice What We Preach: The Use of Hypocrisy and Cognitive Dissonance to Motivate Behavior Change , 2008 .

[14]  Daniel Holbrook,et al.  The Consequentialistic Side of Environmental Ethics , 1997, Environmental Values.

[15]  G. Loewenstein,et al.  Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review , 2002 .

[16]  Stan Openshaw,et al.  Modifiable Areal Unit Problem , 2008, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[17]  Garrett Hardin,et al.  Should Trees Have Standing?: Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects , 2012 .

[18]  Patrick Lin Why Ethics Matters for Autonomous Cars , 2016 .

[19]  Dominic Martin,et al.  Who Should Decide How Machines Make Morally Laden Decisions? , 2017, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[20]  Stephen A. Marglin,et al.  The Social Rate of Discount and The Optimal Rate of Investment , 1963 .

[21]  C. Allen,et al.  Artificial Morality: Top-down, Bottom-up, and Hybrid Approaches , 2005, Ethics and Information Technology.

[22]  Yew-Kwang Ng,et al.  Utility, informed preference, or happiness: Following Harsanyi's argument to its logical conclusion , 1999 .

[23]  Fred C. Adams,et al.  Long-term Astrophysical Processes , 2008 .

[24]  Julius Caesar,et al.  So right it ’ s wrong : Groupthink and the ubiquitous nature of polarized group decision-making , 2007 .

[25]  Ben Goertzel,et al.  Infusing Advanced AGIs with Human-Like Value Systems , 2016, Journal of Ethics and Emerging Technologies.

[26]  Bruce Hannon,et al.  How might nature value man , 1998 .

[27]  Gustaf Arrhenius,et al.  The Boundary Problem in Democratic Theory , 2005 .

[28]  Chris Arney Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness , 2015 .

[29]  E. Vesterinen,et al.  Affective Computing , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[30]  Charles S. Cockell,et al.  Swansong biospheres II: the final signs of life on terrestrial planets near the end of their habitable lifetimes , 2013, International Journal of Astrobiology.

[31]  D. Medin,et al.  Sacred bounds on rational resolution of violent political conflict , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[32]  C. Robert Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies , 2017 .

[33]  Miri Visiting Fellow,et al.  Coherent Extrapolated Volition: A Meta-Level Approach to Machine Ethics , 2010 .

[34]  David Benatar,et al.  Better never to have been : the harm of coming into existence , 2006 .

[35]  S D Baum Better to exist: a reply to Benatar , 2008, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[36]  Roman V. Yampolskiy,et al.  Artificial Intelligence Safety Engineering: Why Machine Ethics Is a Wrong Approach , 2011, PT-AI.

[37]  Yew-Kwang Ng,et al.  Welfarism and Utilitarianism: A Rehabilitation , 1990, Utilitas.

[38]  Nicolas de Condorcet Essai Sur L'Application de L'Analyse a la Probabilite Des Decisions Rendues a la Pluralite Des Voix , 2009 .

[39]  Avi Chaim Mersky,et al.  Fuel economy testing of autonomous vehicles , 2016 .

[40]  N. Bostrom Why I Want to be a Posthuman when I Grow Up , 2013 .

[41]  Jason Borenstein,et al.  Robotic Nudges: The Ethics of Engineering a More Socially Just Human Being , 2015, Science and Engineering Ethics.

[42]  Jonathan Anomaly,et al.  What’s Wrong With Factory Farming? , 2014, Public health ethics.

[43]  S. Baum Description, Prescription and the Choice of Discount Rates , 2009 .

[44]  Kevin R. C. Gutzman Contested Conventions: The Struggle to Establish The Constitution and Save the Union, 1787–1789 by Melvin Yazawa (review) , 2018 .

[45]  Matthew Rainbow Hale Contested Conventions: The Struggle to Establish the Constitution and Save the Union, 1787–1789 by Melvin Yazawa (review) , 2018 .

[46]  Holmes Rolston,et al.  The Preservation of Natural Value in the Solar System , 2007 .

[47]  Charles S. Cockell,et al.  Originism: Ethics and extraterrestrial life , 2007 .

[48]  Colin Allen,et al.  Prolegomena to any future artificial moral agent , 2000, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[49]  Ehtibar N. Dzhafarov,et al.  Descriptive and normative approaches to human behavior , 2011 .

[50]  F. P. Hubbard 'Do Androids Dream?': Personhood and Intelligent Artifacts , 2010 .

[51]  Nancy Tuana,et al.  Intrinsic Ethics Regarding Integrated Assessment Models for Climate Management , 2011, Sci. Eng. Ethics.

[52]  A. Buchanan,et al.  Moral Status and Human Enhancement , 2009 .

[53]  Melvin Yazawa Contested Conventions: The Struggle to Establish the Constitution and Save the Union, 1787–1789 , 2016 .

[54]  C. Allen,et al.  Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong , 2008 .

[55]  L. A. Goodman,et al.  Social Choice and Individual Values , 1951 .

[56]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  Standing for Animals , 1999 .

[57]  Bruce Tonn,et al.  A design for future-oriented government , 1996 .