Should religious thinkers help shape AI?
AI companies are trying to decide how chatbots should respond to morally charged questions about grief, family, medicine, sexuality and belief. Anthropic has consulted theologians and ethicists as it refines Claude’s behavior. Is religious tradition a useful source of moral wisdom for AI, or should chatbot values be shaped through secular, technical processes instead?
Reply to This Discussion
Have something to add? Sign in to join the discussion.
I think the most difficult circumstance confronting the proper humanizing of algorithm derived chat is that, to others than the specialists who design and develop the algorithms, they are opaque. All that is visible is the output that responds to a specific set of set of inputs (and in AI fashion provide a well spoken rationale for the for the response).
The conversations about the proper conduct of humanity, with all its religious, tribal, political etc, all the way down to the individual, with its embedded unique genome, are forever ongoing, and documented in every possible way, including cave walls.
I would say that that the test of success for chatbots to engage in morally charged subjects would be when they are invited to gatherings such as Anthropic's, not as specimens for examinations, but as knowledgeable, insightful, peer consultants. Since AI and the like seem to be having their way with eliminating jobs requiiring thought, why not just keep moral values a last province for homo sapiens?
When AI was getting developed, there was call from many humane organisations to embed ethical values in it. This can still be done.
What did Jesus say on the cross?
"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do"
We as human society still are in the same state.
After all what is the purpose of human existence?
There is a definite purpose for all of us whether we are able to grasp or not .
The SI (Supreme Intelligence) system will ultimately balance it for all living creatures but we are humans so we can make an effort ourselves as good Children of the Ever Merciful Lord.
We must respect all living creatures on this planet and give them the right to live life with dignity without causing any conflict.
Theologian Max Stackhouse argued that ethics must be evaluated through three distinct modes or dimensions: the deontological [right/wrong], the teleological [good/evil/], and the ethological [appropriateness or "the fitting'] In his foundational 1976 paper "Modes of Justification in Ethical Arguments", Stackhouse argued that a comprehensive ethical framework cannot rely on just one of these concepts. Instead, valid moral reasoning requires balancing all three dimensions. I have compared this in my mind to playing Xs and Os {or tic-tac-toe] 3 dimensionally. All must be taken into consideration, i.e. what is good and right may not be fitting to the situation. [Thanks to AI for helping me track down the quote!]
