A way forward for responsibility in the age of AI

Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy:1-34 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Whatever one makes of the relationship between free will and moral responsibility – e.g. whether it’s the case that we can have the latter without the former and, if so, what conditions must be met; whatever one thinks about whether artificially intelligent agents might ever meet such conditions, one still faces the following questions. What is the value of moral responsibility? If we take moral responsibility to be a matter of being a fitting target of moral blame or praise, what are the goods attached to them? The debate concerning ‘machine morality’ is often hinged on whether artificial agents are or could ever be morally responsible, and it is generally taken for granted (following Matthias 2004) that if they cannot, they pose a threat to the moral responsibility system and associated goods. In this paper, I challenge this assumption by asking what the goods of this system, if any, are, and what happens to them in the face of artificially intelligent agents. I will argue that they neither introduce new problems for the moral responsibility system nor do they threaten what we really (ought to) care about. I conclude the paper with a proposal for how to secure this objective.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Agency as difference-making: causal foundations of moral responsibility.Johannes Himmelreich - 2015 - Dissertation, London School of Economics and Political Science
AI Responsibility Gap: Not New, Inevitable, Unproblematic.Huzeyfe Demirtas - forthcoming - Ethics and Information Technology.
Artificial Moral Responsibility: How We Can and Cannot Hold Machines Responsible.Daniel W. Tigard - 2021 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 30 (3):435-447.
Corporations and Non‐Agential Moral Responsibility.James Dempsey - 2013 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 30 (4):334-350.
Attributionist Theories of Moral Responsibility.Matthew Talbert - 2022 - In Dana Kay Nelkin & Derk Pereboom (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Moral Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 50-70.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-06-12

Downloads
194 (#121,908)

6 months
181 (#18,114)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Dane Leigh Gogoshin
University of Helsinki

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references