The moral standing of robots and artificial intelligence (AI) systems has become a widely debated topic by normative research. This discussion, however, has primarily focused on those systems developed for social functions, e.g., social robots. Given the increasing interdependence of society with nonsocial machines, examining how existing normative claims could be extended to specific disrupted sectors, such as the art industry, has become imperative. Inspired by the proposals to ground machines' moral status on social relations advanced by Gunkel and Coeckelbergh, this research presents online experiments () that test whether and how interacting with AI-generated art affects the perceived moral standing of its creator, i.e., the AI-generative system. Our results indicate that assessing an AI system's lack of mind could influence how people subsequently evaluate AI-generated art. We also find that the overvaluation of AI-generated images could negatively affect their creator's perceived agency. Our experiments, however, did not suggest that interacting with AI-generated art has any significant effect on the perceived moral standing of the machine. These findings reveal that social-relational approaches to AI rights could be intertwined with property-based theses of moral standing. We shed light on how empirical studies can contribute to the AI and robot rights debate by revealing the public perception of this issue.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8375468 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.719944 | DOI Listing |
Med Humanit
January 2025
English, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Participatory design places a strong emphasis on human agency, user perspectives and democratic ideals of inclusivity and empowerment, and is therefore often associated with humanist principles and values. In contrast, critical posthumanism questions key humanist assumptions about the centred and singular nature of the 'human condition'. Instead, posthumanism points to the evolving and diverse lived experiences of people and how these are transformed by (and are transforming of) culture, environment and technology.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRes Publica
February 2024
Department of Philosophy, University of Basel, Steinengraben 5, 4051 Basel, Switzerland.
The literature on the epistemology of ignorance already discusses how certain forms of discrimination, such as racism and sexism, are perpetuated by the ignorance of individuals and groups. However, little attention has been given to how speciesism-a form of discrimination on the basis of species membership-is sustained through ignorance Of the few animal ethicists who explicitly discuss ignorance, none have related this concept to speciesism as a form of discrimination. However, it is crucial to explore this connection, I argue, as ignorance is both an integral part of the injustice done to animals as well as an obstacle to improving their treatment.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFI present a bipartite model of organ stewardship that places it at the intersection of resource stewardship and gift stewardship. Though both forms of stewardship are grounded in relationships of trust, they are importantly distinct, as are the duties they confer. This bipartite model of organ stewardship functions as a beneficial instrument for understanding and resolving conflicts among transplant stakeholders.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFFront Health Serv
December 2024
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
This perspective article shares the viewpoints of two long-standing patient safety advocates who have participated first-hand in the evolution of patient engagement in healthcare quality and safety. Their involvement is motivated by a rejection of the common cruelty of institutional betrayal that compounds harm when patient safety fails. The advocates have sought to understand how it can be that fractured trust spreads so predictably after harm, just when it most needs strengthening.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe practice of recontact in genomic medicine has the power to help rectify long-standing inequities in genetic testing. However, if not delivered systematically, recontacting practices also have the potential to reinforce these same inequities. Recontact, which occurs when contact between a clinician and patient is reinitiated after a relationship has ended, is often in search of or in response to updated interpretation or results.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!