The Machine Question

Last updated
The Machine Question
The Machine Question Cover.jpg
Cover for The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics
Author David J. Gunkel
Genre Non-fiction, philosophy, computer science, ethics
Publisher MIT Press
Publication date
July 13, 2012
Media typePrint (Hardcover & paperback)
Pages270
ISBN 0262017431

The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics is a 2012 nonfiction book by David J. Gunkel that discusses the evolution of the theory of human ethical responsibilities toward non-human things and to what extent intelligent, autonomous machines can be considered to have legitimate moral responsibilities and what legitimate claims to moral consideration they can hold. The book was awarded as the 2012 Best Single Authored Book by the Communication Ethics Division of the National Communication Association. [1]

Contents

Content

The book is spread across three chapters, with the first two chapters focusing on an overall review of the history of philosophy and its discussion of moral agency, moral rights, human rights, and animal rights and the third chapter focusing on what defines "thingness" and why machines have been excluded from moral and ethical consideration due to a misuse of the patient/agent binary. [2]

The first chapter, titled Moral Agency, breaks down the history of said agency based on what it included and excluded in various parts of history. Gunkel also raises the conflict between discussing the morality of humans toward objects and the theory of the philosophy of technology that "technology is merely a tool: a means to an end". [2] The main issue, he explains, in defining what constitutes an appropriate moral agent is that there will be things left outside of what is included, as the definition is based on a set of characteristics that will inherently not be all-encompassing. [3] The subject of consciousness is broached and subsequently derided by Gunkel because of it being one of the main arguments against machine rights, while Gunkel points out that no "settled definition" of the term exists and that he considers it no better than a synonym used for "the occultish soul". In addition, the issue of the other minds problem entails that no proper understanding of consciousness can come to pass due to the inability to properly understand the mind of a being that is not oneself. [4]

The second chapter, titled Moral Patiency, focuses on the patient end of the topic and discusses the expansion of the fields of animal studies and environmental studies. [2] Gunkel describes moral patients as the ones that are to be the object of moral consideration and deserve such consideration even if they lack their own agency, such as animals, thus allowing moral consideration itself to be broader and more inclusive. [3] The topic of other minds is discussed again when examining the question of whether animals can suffer, a question that Gunkel ultimately abandons because it encounters the same problems that the topic of consciousness does. Especially because the subject of animal rights is often only afforded for the animals deemed to be "cute", but often not including "reptiles, insects, or microbes". Gunkel continues on to examine environmental ethics and information ethics, but finds them to be too anthropocentric, just as all the other examined models have been. [4]

The third chapter, titled Thinking Otherwise, proposes a combination of Heideggerian ontology and Levinasian ethics to properly discuss the otherness of technology and machines, but finds that the patient/agent binary is unable to be properly extended to confine the extent of "the machine question". [2] In discussing the land ethic philosophy espoused by Aldo Leopold, Gunkel proposes that it is the entire relationship between agent and patient that should have moral consideration and not a specific definition based on either side, as each part contributes to the relationship as a whole and cannot be removed without breaking that relationship. [3]

Critical reception

Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries writer R. S. Stansbury explained that the book is able to use simple examples to discuss difficult topics and separate ideas and that it would be "useful for philosophy students, and for engineering students interested in exploring the ethical implications of their work". [5] Dominika Dzwonkowska, writing for International Philosophical Quarterly , stated that the "unprecedented value of the book is that Gunkel not only analyzes important aspects of the immediate problem but also that he places his discussion in the context of philosophical discussions on such related issues as rights discourse." [6] Mark Coeckelbergh in Ethics and Information Technology noted that focusing on the question itself of the machine question allows further exploration of machine ethics and the expansion of general ethics and that the book's questions point out that "good, critical philosophical reflection on machines is not only about how we should cope with machines, but also about how we (should) think and what role technology plays (and should play) in this thinking." [7]

A review in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews by Colin Allen criticized some of Gunkel's methodology and the indecisiveness of his ultimate answer to the machine question, but also acknowledged that the book "succeeded in connecting the ethics of robots and AI to a much broader ethical discussion than has been represented in the literature on machine ethics to date". [8] Blay Whitby, in a review for AISB Quarterly , lauded The Machine Question for its "clear exposition" and wide range of references to other works, concluding that the book is "essential reading for philosophers interested in AI, robot ethics, or animal ethics". [9] In a twin review of The Machine Question and Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robots by Patrick Lin, Keith Abney, and George A. Bekey, Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology reviewer Jeff Shaw called Gunkel's book a good introduction to the "complex field of robot ethics" and that both books are "highly recommended to both the general reader as well as to experts in the field of robotics, philosophy, and ethics." [10]

In a 2017 paper for Ethics and Information Technology , Katharyn Hogan investigated whether the machine question presented by Gunkel in the book is any different from the longstanding animal question. She concludes that the real question that is revealed from this discussion is whether humans deserve any moral preference over artificial life in the first place. [11]

See also

Related Research Articles

Bioethics is both a field of study and professional practice, interested in ethical issues related to health, including those emerging from advances in biology, medicine, and technologies. It proposes the discussion about moral discernment in society and it is often related to medical policy and practice, but also to broader questions as environment, well-being and public health. Bioethics is concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law, theology and philosophy. It includes the study of values relating to primary care, other branches of medicine, ethical education in science, animal, and environmental ethics, and public health.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Applied philosophy</span> Branch of philosophy

Applied philosophy is a branch of philosophy that studies philosophical problems of practical concern. The topic covers a broad spectrum of issues in environment, medicine, science, engineering, policy, law, politics, economics and education. The term was popularised in 1982 by the founding of the Society for Applied Philosophy by Brenda Almond, and its subsequent journal publication Journal of Applied Philosophy edited by Elizabeth Brake. Methods of applied philosophy are similar to other philosophical methods including questioning, dialectic, critical discussion, rational argument, systematic presentation, thought experiments and logical argumentation.

The ethics of technology is a sub-field of ethics addressing ethical questions specific to the technology age, the transitional shift in society wherein personal computers and subsequent devices provide for the quick and easy transfer of information. Technology ethics is the application of ethical thinking to growing concerns as new technologies continue to rise in prominence.

Moral agency is an individual's ability to make moral choices based on some notion of right and wrong and to be held accountable for these actions. A moral agent is "a being who is capable of acting with reference to right and wrong."

Philosophy and economics studies topics such as public economics, behavioural economics, rationality, justice, history of economic thought, rational choice, the appraisal of economic outcomes, institutions and processes, the status of highly idealized economic models, the ontology of economic phenomena and the possibilities of acquiring knowledge of them.

Robot ethics, sometimes known as "roboethics", concerns ethical problems that occur with robots, such as whether robots pose a threat to humans in the long or short run, whether some uses of robots are problematic, and how robots should be designed such that they act 'ethically'. Alternatively, roboethics refers specifically to the ethics of human behavior towards robots, as robots become increasingly advanced. Robot ethics is a sub-field of ethics of technology, specifically information technology, and it has close links to legal as well as socio-economic concerns. Researchers from diverse areas are beginning to tackle ethical questions about creating robotic technology and implementing it in societies, in a way that will still ensure the safety of the human race.

The ethics of artificial intelligence covers a broad range of topics within the field that are considered to have particular ethical stakes. This includes algorithmic biases, fairness, automated decision-making, accountability, privacy, and regulation. It also covers various emerging or potential future challenges such as machine ethics, lethal autonomous weapon systems, arms race dynamics, AI safety and alignment, technological unemployment, AI-enabled misinformation, how to treat certain AI systems if they have a moral status, artificial superintelligence and existential risks.

Under article 23 of the Gene Technology Act, the Swiss Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnology (ECNH) is an extra-parliamentary advisory committee, appointed to advise the Federal Council and the federal and cantonal authorities on matters of regulations and enforcement of legislation in the field of non-human biotechnology. The Federal Council established the ECNH by decree on 27 April 1998. It is administratively attached to the Federal Office for the Environment in the Department of Environment, Transport, Energy and Communications.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">David J. Gunkel</span> American writer

David J. Gunkel is an American academic and Presidential Teaching Professor of Communication Studies at Northern Illinois University. He teaches courses in web design and programming, information and communication technology (ICT), and cyberculture. His research and publications examine the philosophical assumptions and ethical consequences of ICT.

Machine ethics is a part of the ethics of artificial intelligence concerned with adding or ensuring moral behaviors of man-made machines that use artificial intelligence, otherwise known as artificial intelligent agents. Machine ethics differs from other ethical fields related to engineering and technology. It should not be confused with computer ethics, which focuses on human use of computers. It should also be distinguished from the philosophy of technology, which concerns itself with technology's grander social effects.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alice Crary</span> American philosopher

Alice Crary is an American philosopher who currently holds the positions of University Distinguished Professor at the Graduate Faculty, The New School for Social Research in New York City and Visiting Fellow at Regent's Park College, University of Oxford, U.K..

Steven Frederic Sapontzis is an American moral philosopher. He is professor emeritus of philosophy at California State University, East Bay and specializes in animal ethics, environmental ethics and meta-ethics. His best known work is Morals, Reason, and Animals, published in 1987. Sapontzis' philosophy advocates for extending moral personhood and ethical consideration to animals based on their capacity for interests and suffering, challenging anthropocentric norms and speciesism, and instead promoting empathy, vegan activism, and systemic change to reduce animal exploitation.

Philosophy of sport is an area of philosophy that seeks to conceptually analyze issues of sport as human activity. These issues cover many areas, but fall primarily into five philosophical categories: metaphysics, ethics and moral philosophy, philosophy of law, political philosophy and aesthetics. The philosophical perspective on sport originated in Ancient Greece, having experienced a revival in the latter part of the 20th century with the work of Paul Weiss and Howard Slusher.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mark Coeckelbergh</span> Belgian philosopher of technology

Mark Coeckelbergh is a Belgian philosopher of technology. He is Professor of Philosophy of Media and Technology at the Department of Philosophy of the University of Vienna and former President of the Society for Philosophy and Technology. He was previously Professor of Technology and Social Responsibility at De Montfort University in Leicester, UK, Managing Director of the 3TU Centre for Ethics and Technology, and a member of the Philosophy Department of the University of Twente. Before moving to Austria, he has lived and worked in Belgium, the UK, and the Netherlands. He is the author of several books, including Growing Moral Relations (2012), Human Being @ Risk (2013), Environmental Skill (2015), Money Machines (2015), New Romantic Cyborgs (2017), Moved by Machines (2019), the textbook Introduction to Philosophy of Technology (2019), and AI Ethics (2020). He has written many articles and is an expert in ethics of artificial intelligence. He is best known for his work in philosophy of technology and ethics of robotics and artificial intelligence (AI), he has also published in the areas of moral philosophy and environmental philosophy.

Kenneth Einar Himma is an American philosopher, author, lawyer, academic and lecturer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">S. Matthew Liao</span> Taiwanese-born American philosopher

S. Matthew Liao is a Taiwanese-American philosopher specializing in bioethics and normative ethics. Liao currently holds the Arthur Zitrin Chair of Bioethics, and is the Director of the Center for Bioethics and Affiliated Professor in the Department of Philosophy at New York University. He has previously held appointments at Oxford, Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, and Princeton.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ethics of uncertain sentience</span> Applied ethics issue

The ethics of uncertain sentience refers to questions surrounding the treatment of and moral obligations towards individuals whose sentience—the capacity to subjectively sense and feel—and resulting ability to experience pain is uncertain; the topic has been particularly discussed within the field of animal ethics, with the precautionary principle frequently invoked in response.

<i>Evolutional Ethics and Animal Psychology</i> 1897 book by Edward Payson Evans

Evolutional Ethics and Animal Psychology is an 1897 book by the American scholar and early animal rights advocate Edward Payson Evans. It is an in-depth exploration of the intersection between ethical theory and animal psychology, with a particular focus on the rights of animals and the moral obligations humans have toward them.

Moral circle expansion is an increase over time in the number and type of entities given moral consideration. The general idea of moral inclusion was discussed by ancient philosophers and since the 19th century has inspired social movements related to human rights and animal rights. Especially in relation to animal rights, the philosopher Peter Singer has written about the subject since the 1970s, and since 2017 so has the think tank Sentience Institute, part of the 21st-century effective altruism movement. There is significant debate on whether humanity actually has an expanding moral circle, considering topics such as the lack of a uniform border of growing moral consideration and the disconnect between people's moral attitudes and their behavior. Research into the phenomenon is ongoing.

Moral patienthood is the state of being eligible for moral consideration by a moral agent. In other words, the morality of an action can depend on how it affects or relates to moral patients.

References

  1. "NCA Comm365: Celebrating 100 Years of Communication Research" (PDF). Natcom.org. National Communication Association. 2012. Retrieved March 27, 2015.
  2. 1 2 3 4 McDowell, Zachary J. (September 2014). "The machine question: Critical perspectives on AI, robots, and ethics". New Media & Society . 16 (6): 1041–1043. doi:10.1177/1461444814535723d. S2CID   29059564.
  3. 1 2 3 Denton, Peter H. (January 31, 2014). "Book review: The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics". Essays in Philosophy . 15 (1): 179–183. doi: 10.7710/1526-0569.1497 . Retrieved March 21, 2015.
  4. 1 2 Gottlieb, Jeffrey D. (March 1, 2013). "Questions Left Unanswered". Ethics & Behavior . 23 (2): 163–166. doi:10.1080/10508422.2012.756707. S2CID   146890431.
  5. Stansbury, R. S. (May 2013). "Reviews: The machine question: critical perspectives on AI, robots, and ethics". Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries . 50 (9): 50–4929. doi:10.5860/CHOICE.50-4929 (inactive 1 February 2025).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of February 2025 (link)
  6. Dzwonkowska, Dominika (March 2013). "The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics". International Philosophical Quarterly . 53 (1): 91–93. doi:10.5840/ipq201353111 . Retrieved March 21, 2015.
  7. Coeckelbergh, Mark (September 2013). "David J. Gunkel: The machine question: critical perspectives on AI, robots, and ethics". Ethics and Information Technology . 15 (3): 235–238. doi:10.1007/s10676-012-9305-y. S2CID   14156663.
  8. Allen, Colin (February 13, 2013). "The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics". Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. Retrieved March 24, 2015.
  9. Whitby, Blay (March 2014). "Book review: The Machine Question: Critical perspectives on AI, robots, and ethics (Gunkel, 2012)" (PDF). AISB Quarterly . 138: 23–24. Retrieved March 24, 2015.
  10. Shaw, Jeff (Fall 2014). "Machines and Robots: Ethical Considerations". Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology . 18 (3): 248–250. doi:10.5840/techne201418322 . Retrieved March 27, 2015.
  11. Hogan K (April 1, 2017). "Is the machine question the same question as the animal question?". Ethics and Information Technology . 19: 29–38. doi:10.1007/s10676-017-9418-4. S2CID   7920821 . Retrieved December 9, 2020.