Re:Tell HN: Stop Making AI “Moral”
by PaulHoule on Monday December 12, 2022 @02:16PM
(#33958877)
In my pod we've been talking about the overlap between a system getting (1) logically correct answers and making (2) correct moral judgements. I'd say that that (2) requires (1) in that you can't make correct moral judgements if you can't understand the facts of the situation.
Somebody who is biblically oriented might say that you can make moral judgements because "god is inside you" and/or because you have a soul that makes you subject to discipline in the afterlife.
Our family business is a horse farm and my son told me that he thinks animals have a moral instinct and I can believe that because I've seen that. The first time I fell off a horse it seemed to me that the horse expressed contrition. Frequently I've seen animals, even cats, seem to know it when they haven't lived up to the expectations of their groups.
Modelling intelligence in terms of language has a controversial history (e.g. the failure of structuralism as well as the failure of linguistics to make working language technology.) Animals seem to have a high level of "commonsense" intelligence including theories of mind, contingent situations, etc.
I don't have an airtight argument about it yet but I think we're going to hear people say that they perceive GPT-3 is lacking a "soul" or some spark that people have and I think there will be some conflation there of that ability to make correct judgements about "the situation" and the ability to make moral judgements.
Somebody who is biblically oriented might say that you can make moral judgements because "god is inside you" and/or because you have a soul that makes you subject to discipline in the afterlife.
Our family business is a horse farm and my son told me that he thinks animals have a moral instinct and I can believe that because I've seen that. The first time I fell off a horse it seemed to me that the horse expressed contrition. Frequently I've seen animals, even cats, seem to know it when they haven't lived up to the expectations of their groups.
Modelling intelligence in terms of language has a controversial history (e.g. the failure of structuralism as well as the failure of linguistics to make working language technology.) Animals seem to have a high level of "commonsense" intelligence including theories of mind, contingent situations, etc.
I don't have an airtight argument about it yet but I think we're going to hear people say that they perceive GPT-3 is lacking a "soul" or some spark that people have and I think there will be some conflation there of that ability to make correct judgements about "the situation" and the ability to make moral judgements.