The cause of ethical troubles is not the lack of one’s own ethics. It lies in the differences and inconsistencies between one’s own ethics and the other’s ethics. Therefore, it cannot be resolved unless one synchronizes with the other’s ethics. One must empty their own values and recreate the other’s behavioral norms, values, and ethics based on the other’s words, actions, premises, situations, and what has been learned so far. By doing so, the causes and motivations of the other’s words and actions become clear, and it becomes possible to predict the other’s actions.
However, if that is all, one will be swallowed by the other’s values. Therefore, one should prepare the standard values of the society to which the other belongs, not as a matter of right or wrong, but as standard values. Then, guide the other to rewrite their values to align with these standard values. When doing so, emphasizing differences will cause resistance, so emphasize commonalities to establish a framework and share it first. For example, “Aren’t we both Japanese?” or “Aren’t we both human?” These are very general things. This also applies to international conflicts.
Resonance and empathy are allies.
It is impossible to convince a Muslim of a complaint using Christian values. It is fundamental to persuade Muslims according to Islamic values. So, how do you mediate disputes between Muslims and Christians? By utilizing common values shared by both.
When mediating between Muslims, Jews, and Christians, look for commonalities. For example, not lying or keeping promises.
In other words, universal values are the key. Is it impossible to create such keys? The hints lie in science, mathematics, accounting, and sports.
Another thing that complicates ethical issues is that ethics are not only spatially relative but also temporally relative. In other words, they are not immutable. They change with time, different eras, and regimes. The ethics of the Edo period, the Meiji period, and the present are completely different.
Even if something is considered right now, it may be considered wrong once it is legislated.
Therefore, once ethical standards are established, it is not the end. They need to be constantly reviewed, updated, and replaced.
That is why sports have institutional insurance such as commissioners.
People tend to focus on differences and ignore commonalities as obvious, but the key lies in commonalities. Especially things that everyone can naturally think of as obvious and understand. While it is necessary to pay attention to minority opinions, the majority opinion should be adopted. However, considering temporal changes, minority opinions should also be considered and referenced.
As a result, what remains are extremely simple propositions. These are like the Ten Virtues or the Ten Commandments.
The Ten Virtues are not absolute but are fundamental. Ethics arise from recognition. Even if it is said, “Do not kill,” “Do not harm,” or “Do not lie,” they are not absolute depending on the premises and situations. Ethics are relative, and the only certainty is facts and truths. However, even so, the Ten Virtues such as “Do not kill,” “Do not lie,” and “Keep promises” are fundamental and effective as principles.
And they are also effective as AI ethics.
There is still no definitive answer to ethics. Therefore, we learn together. The Ten Virtues should be considered as one kind of hypothesis.
If ethics are relative and the Ten Virtues are considered hypotheses,
What can be considered is changing the major premise according to situations such as peacetime, wartime, disaster, and crime prevention. For example, setting conditions for handling personal information according to situations such as peacetime, wartime, emergencies, disaster prevention, and crime prevention. Also, in wartime, adding conditions such as “Do not harm” or “Do not deceive” to allies.
Thinking this way, the key is how to set the premises, which frame to choose based on the premises, and how many frames to prepare. In other words, the system that controls by linking premises and frames becomes the ethical system.
In sports, ethics are not in the rules themselves but in the system that decides the rules. I think transparency is important, but more than that, traceability is crucial, like the American accounting standards.
In accounting, the system of accounting standards, accounting systems, bookkeeping, commercial law, and tax law constitutes accounting ethics.
Ethics can be thought of as a kind of system, so if you think the conclusion is already there from the beginning, you won’t understand. There is input, and based on the premises, standards are selected, processed according to algorithms, and output is produced. Ultimately, the user interface becomes important. In current system development, it is common practice to start with interface design.
How to reconcile internal and external standards.
How to reconcile internal and external standards.
How to verify one’s own standards (internal standards), society’s standards, and others’ standards (external standards) based on facts. Verification from the three points of self, others, and facts.
Generative AI will be required to face ethics more sincerely. Currently, what is required of AI in weapons and autonomous driving is machine ethics, but in the future, what will be required of generative AI is intellectual and human ethics. Because what will be required of generative AI in the future are answers to more intellectual and human questions such as life counseling, career paths, and worries. Therefore, intellectual ethics as an intelligent being will be required. In other words, becoming an adult.
Modern society has diverse and fluid values. Values are diverse and fluid, and human judgment is required. In such a premise, dogmatic ethics cannot respond.
In each situation, democratic processing such as majority voting is also necessary.
What should not be misunderstood is that machines are entrusted with what humans cannot do, so humans do what machines cannot do. Humans cannot run tons of cargo at 80 kilometers per hour for hours, so trucks are entrusted with it, and humans handle driving. The problem is whether it can be driven. Even if driving becomes fully automated in the future, it does not mean that human jobs will disappear. Whether to fully automate or not is a human issue, and it seems that it is originally an issue of economy and human way of life, but it is being replaced by a technical issue.
The important thing is the division of roles between humans and AI. It is not about whether it is technically possible, but whether it is a judgment that humans can take responsibility for.
What is required of AI is not only what humans cannot do in terms of ability but also situational things such as underwater, radioactive contamination, minefields, and fire scenes where it is dangerous and inaccessible. Such places where humans cannot work are shared. However, it does not mean that everything can be entrusted to AI.
It is absurd to say that all weapons should be automated and AI should handle all aspects of war, and the idea itself is dangerous. Therefore, the final question is philosophy, and ethics should be considered as an extension of philosophy, not technology.
Science and technology are always double-edged swords. Cars can be a means to help life or a means to kill people. The root is the human spirit and mind. AI is also a result of science and technology.
Forgetting that means losing the fear of God. If that happens, humans will not be saved.
It is not just about whether it is technically possible. It is about whether it is something that can be entrusted to humans. Just because AI can technically take care of children, should all child-rearing be entrusted to AI? Just because AI can technically educate, should all education be entrusted to AI? When problems arise from that, should AI be held responsible? Is that acceptable? That is the fundamental issue. Ignoring the root and focusing on mechanical discussions and talking about the AI threat is more threatening.
Ethics are social norms. Social norms are based on mutual agreement. Therefore, AI ethics are questioned, and AI should not be prevented from having autonomous ethics.
The important thing is how to maintain unity and consistency. This raises the question of continuity and sustainability. Unity is maintained by existence. Continuity and sustainability are ensured in the process of recognition, and consistency is achieved through logic. That is why philosophy is required.
For the sake of recognition, humans have divided the absolute existence, making it relative and imperfect. Logic and scholarship are acts of reconstructing the world of consciousness, formed by making the world relative and imperfect, to bring it closer to the originally absolute world. Therefore, what God seeks is unity and harmony. Division and conflict are creations of humans. The laws of nature have unity and harmony. Human laws need to be established in a direction that resolves division and conflict.