Porcelain Publishing / JHC / Volume 8 / Issue 2 / DOI: 10.47297/wspjhcWSP2515-469903.20240802
ARTICLE

On the Moral Status of Artificial Cognition to Natural Cognition

Jianhua Xie1
Show Less
1 School of Marxism, Taiyuan Normal University, Jinzhong 030619, China
Published: 17 December 2024
© 2024 by the Author(s). This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
Abstract

Artificial Cognition (AC) has provoked a great deal of controversy in recent years. Concerns over its development have revolved around the questions of whether or not a moral status may be ascribed to AC and, if so, how could it be characterized? This paper provides an analysis of consciousness as a means to query the moral status of AC. This method suggests that the question of moral status of artificial cognition depends upon the level of development of consciousness achieved. As a means by which to distinguish among different levels of technological capabilities, we propose a scale of AC statuses in the relationship with natural cognition of humans: no status, low status, equal status and high status. This research draws from classical theories of ethics, in particular utilitarianism and deontology, to explain the differences and shortcomings of the four propositions. The philosophical arguments presented serve to challenge common assumptions about natural cognition of human relationships with AC as well as to suggest that future technological advances should be directed toward the achievement of a position of equality in those relationships. This shows that artificial cognition has no moral status at present, but could have the same moral status as natural cognition of human beings in the future.

Keywords
Artificial cognition; Moral status; Consciousness; Deontology; Utilitarianism
References
[1]Aquinas T.(1975). Summa contra gentiles (A. C. Pegis, J. F. Anderson, V. J. Bourke, & C. J. O'Neil, Trans.). Notre Dame:University of Notre Dame Press.
[2]Aquinas T.(1981). Summa theologiae (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Allen: Christian Classics.
[3]Aristotle (2009).The Nicomachean ethics(D. Ross, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[4]Asimov I.(1950). I, robot. New York: Gnome Press.
[5]Bostrom N.(2018). The interests of digital minds. https://nickbostrom.com/papers/interests-of-digital-minds.pdf.Accessed 7 October 2019.
[6]Bostrom N., Dafoe A., & Flynn C.(2018). Public policy and superintelligent AI: A vector field approach. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9601/74bf6c840bc036ca7c621e9cda20634a51ff.pdf. Accessed 7 October 2019.
[7]Bostrom N., & Yudkowsky E.(2011). The ethics of artificial intelligence. http://www.doc88.com/p-1496981855025.html. Accessed 7 October 2019.
[8]Descartes R.(1983). Principles of philosophy (V. R. Miller, & R. P. Miller, Trans.). Dordrecht: Springer.[9]Descartes R.(2003). Discourse on method and meditations (E. S. Haldane, & G. R. T. Ross, Trans.). Mineola: Dover.
[10]Elliott C.(2011). Enhancement technologies and the modern self. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy,36(4),364–374. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhr031.
[11]Ford J. K. B., Ellis G. M., Matkin D. R., Balcomb K. C., Briggs D., & Morton A. B.(2005). Killer whale attacks on minke whales: Prey capture and antipredator tactics. Marine Mammal Science,21(4),603–618. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-7692.2005.tb01254.x.
[12]Gallup G. G.(1970). Chimpanzees: Self-recognition. Science,167(3914),86–87. https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.167.3914.86.
[13]Holden C.(1979). Paul MacLean and the triune brain. Science,204(4397),1066–1068. https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.377485.
[14]Hunt G. R.(1996). Manufacture and use of hook-tools by New Caledonian crows. Nature,379(6562),249–251. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/379249a0.
[15]Huth A. G., de Heer W. A., Griffiths T. L., Theunissen F. E., & Gallant J. L.(2016). Natural speech reveals the semantic maps that tile human cerebral cortex. Nature,532(7600),453–458. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature17637.
[16]Huxley J.(1968). Transhumanism. Journal of Humanistic Psychology,8(1),73–76. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002216786800800107.
[17]Kant I.(1956). Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. New York: Harper Torchbooks.
[18]McCloskey H. J.(1979). Moral rights and animals. Inquiry,22(1–4),23–54. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00201747908601865.
[19]Mill J. S.(1998). Utilitarianism. New York: Oxford University Press.
[20]Morgan C. L.(1894). An introduction to comparative psychology. London: Walter Scott.
[21]Müller-Lauter W.(1999).Nietzsche: His philosophy of contradictions and the contradictions of his philosophy(D. Parent,Trans.. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
[22]Murdy W. H.(1975). Anthropocentrism: A modern version. Science,187(4182),1168–1172. https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.187.4182.1168.
[23]Putnam H.(1967). Psychological predicates. In W. H. Capitan, & D. D. Merrill (Eds.), Art, mind, and religion (pp.37–48). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
[24]Rawls J.(1999). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Belknap Press.
[25]Searle J. R.(1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,3(3),417–424. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00005756.
[26]Singer P.(2011). Practical ethics (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[27]Tang S., Wolf R., Xu S., & Heisenberg M.(2004). Visual pattern recognition in Drosophila is invariant for retinal position. Science,305(5686),1020–1022. https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1099839.
[28]Tye M.(2017). Do fish have feelings? In K. Andrews, & J. Beck (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of animal minds (pp.169–175). London: Routledge.
[29]Wei Y. D.(2019). Adaptive representation: A unified category of natural cognition and artificial cognition.Philosophical Research,09,114–124.
[30]Williams F. E., White D., & Messer W. S.(2002). A simple spatial alternation task for assessing memory function in zebrafish. Behavioural Processes,58(3),125–132. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0376-6357(02)00025-6.[31]Ziesche S., & Yampolskiy R. V.(2019). Do no harm policy for minds in other substrates. Journal of Evolution and Technology,29(2),1–11.
 
Share
Back to top
Journal of Human Cognition, Electronic ISSN: 2753-5215 Print ISSN: 2515-4699, Published by Porcelain Publishing