Abstract
This article presents two approaches for computer simulations of virtue ethics in the context of agent-based modeling, a simple way and a complex way. The simple way represents virtues as numeric variables that are invoked in specific events or situations. This way can easily be implemented and included in social simulations. On the other hand, the complex way requires a PECS framework: physical, cognitive, emotional, and social components need to be implemented in agents. Virtue is the result of the interaction of these internal components rather than a single variable. I argue that the complex way using the PECS framework is more suitable for simulating virtue ethics theory because it can capture the internal struggle and conflict sometimes involved in the practice of virtue. To show how the complex way could function, I present a sample computer simulation for the cardinal virtue of temperance, the virtue that moderates physical desires such as food, drink, and sex. This computer simulation is programmed in Python and builds upon the well-known Sugarscape simulation.1
1The Python source code for the complex way is available at https://github.com/JeremiahLR/Temperance. All the code snippets in this article are also written in Python. I have chosen Python because it is one of the easiest programming languages to learn and to run, especially for philosophers with no programming experience. However, all the code can be rewritten in other programming languages.
References
Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Edited by Commissio Leonina. Vol. 4-12, Opera omnia iussu impensaque Leonis XIII P.M. edita. Rome: Typographia Polyglotta S.C. de Propaganda Fide, 1888-1906.Search in Google Scholar
Aquinas, Thomas. The “Summa Theologica” of St. Thomas Aquinas. Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province. 2nd and Revised ed. London: Burns Oates and Washbourne, 1920.Search in Google Scholar
Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Terence Irwin. 2nd ed. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 1999.10.1093/oseo/instance.00258595Search in Google Scholar
Axelrod, Robert. The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books, 1984.Search in Google Scholar
Balke, Tina, and Nigel Gilbert. “How Do Agents Make Decisions? A Survey.” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 17:4:13 (2014). doi: 10.18564/jasss.2687.10.18564/jasss.2687Search in Google Scholar
Danielson, Peter. Artificial Morality: Virtuous Robots for Virtual Games. London: Routledge, 1992.Search in Google Scholar
Epstein, Joshua. Agent_Zero: Toward Neurocognitive Foundations for Generative Social Science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
Epstein, Joshua, and Robert Axtell. Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up. Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1996.10.7551/mitpress/3374.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Epstein, Joshua, and Julia Chelen. “Advancing Agent_Zero.” In Complexity and Evolution: Toward a New Synthesis for Economics, edited by David S. Wilson and Alan Kirman, 299-318. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2016.Search in Google Scholar
Gauthier, David. Morals by Agreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986.10.1093/0198249926.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Hegselmann, Rainer, and Oliver Will. “Modelling Hume’s Moral and Political Theory—The Design of HUME1.0.” In Norms and Values: The Role of Social Norms as Instruments of Value Realisation, edited by Michael Baurmann, Geoffrey Brennan, Robert E. Goodin, and Nicholas Southwood, 205-232. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2010.Search in Google Scholar
Hegselmann, Rainer. “Moral Dynamics.” In Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science 2009, edited by Robert Meyers, 5677-5692. New York: Springer, 2009.10.1007/978-0-387-30440-3_338Search in Google Scholar
Laird, John. The Soar Cognitive Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2012.10.7551/mitpress/7688.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alasdair. After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory. 3rd ed. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame, [1981] 2007.Search in Google Scholar
Mascaro, Steven. “Abortion, Rape and Suicide: Evolutionary ALife Investigations of Ethically Contentious Behaviour.” Doctor of Philosophy, Clayton School of Information Technology, Monash University, 2008.Search in Google Scholar
Mascaro, Steven, Kevin Korb, and Ann Nicholson. “Suicide as an Evolutionarily Stable Strategy.” In Advances in Artificial Life, edited by Josef Kelemen and Petr Sosík, 120-132. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2001.10.1007/3-540-44811-X_12Search in Google Scholar
Mascaro, Steven, Kevin Korb, and Ann Nicholson. “A Life Investigation of Parental Investment in Reproductive Strategies.” In Artificial Life VIII: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Artificial Life, edited by Russell Standish, Mark A. Bedau, and Hussein A. Abbass, 358-361. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2003.Search in Google Scholar
Mascaro, Steven, Kevin Korb, Ann Nicholson, and Owen Woodberry. Evolving Ethics: The New Science of Good and Evil. Exeter: Imprint Academic, 2010.Search in Google Scholar
Rao, Anand, and Michael Georgeff. “BDI-Agents: From Theory to Practice.” In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Multiagent Systems, June 12-14, 1995, 312-319. San Francisco: AAAI Press, 1995.Search in Google Scholar
Reyes, Jeremiah. “Loób and Kapwa: An Introduction to a Filipino Virtue Ethics.” Asian Philosophy: An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East 25:2 (2015), 148-171.10.1080/09552367.2015.1043173Search in Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas. “Models of Segregation.” The American Economic Review 59:2 (1969), 488-493.Search in Google Scholar
Schelling, Thomas. Micromotives and Macrobehavior. New York: W. W. Norton, 1978.Search in Google Scholar
Schmidt, Bernd. The Modelling of Human Behaviour. Ghent, Belgium: SCS-Europe BVBA, 2000.Search in Google Scholar
Urban, Christoph. “PECS: A Reference Model for the Simulation of Multi-Agent Systems.” In Tools and Techniques for Social Science Simulation, edited by Ramzi Suleiman, Klaus Troitzsch and Nigel Gilbert, 83-114. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, 2000.Search in Google Scholar
Wiegel, Vincent. “SophoLab: Experimental Computational Philosophy.” Doctor of Philosophy, Technische Universiteit Delft, 2007.Search in Google Scholar
Will, Oliver. “Hume1.0 - An Agent-Based Model on the Evolution of Trust in Strangers and Division of Labour.” In Multi-Agent-Based Simulation X, edited by Gennaro Di Tosto and H. Van Dyke Parunak, 123-134. Berlin: Spring-Verlag, 2010.10.1007/978-3-642-13553-8_11Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Jeremiah A. Lasquety-Reyes, published by De Gruyter Open
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
