Aug 2026· Journal of Consciousness Studies· 0 citations· 7 references
Abstract
In the current debate about AI consciousness, philosophers tend to agree that the potential for AI consciousness raises profound moral questions — for example, some philosophers think that we may imminently create systems that deserve rights similar to those of humans. But it
is also widely agreed that it will be very difficult to tell whether an artificial system is conscious, so we may be ignorant of a fact that makes a profound moral difference. In this paper I offer an alternative, deflationary understanding of these issues. I don’t think there is a profound
metaphysical question of whether an AI is conscious, or that we are condemned to ignorance about AI consciousness in any interesting sense. I do think potentially conscious AI systems could raise difficult moral and political challenges, but not because we are ignorant of important facts about
them. The difficulties rather have to do with extending our moral and psychological thinking into uncharted waters for which it was not designed. This is particularly true if we are committed to avoiding anthropocentric bias in our ethics — and I explain why I think that even those taking
rights for AI seriously are guilty of a covert anthropocentrism in their thinking.
Some philosophers argue that near‐term artificial intelligence (AI) systems might soon be welfare subjects. We should take AI welfare seriously, they urge, because AI systems might soon have properties indicated by our best scientific theories of consciousness, and consciousness suffices for welfare subjectivity. I arg...
Preston Lennon· Philosophy and Phenomenologi...· 0 citations
Human freedom and moral responsibility have been among the most controversial in modern philosophy due to their implications in metaphysics, ethics, moral psychology, law, neuroscience and social theory. The question was debated in traditional terms as a struggle between free will and determinism: When all actions are...
Ismat Ara· British Journal of Arts and...· 0 citations
The authors can assess whether an AI has states that would constitute valenced experiences if it were conscious and show how this is sufficient to ground a responsible approach to the development of potentially conscious AI.
It is argued that for advanced AI systems deployed in high-stakes environments the more urgent question may be prudential and strategic, and there is a threshold of evidential and strategic risk beyond which it becomes rationally justified to adopt norms of treatment that include constraints on coercion, deletion, and...
In order to live well in an AI-based society, designing technically ethical systems, in the spirit of consequentialism, is not enough; rather, it is essential to cultivate citizens who, as AI users, are endowed with virtues and, first and foremost, the virtue of prudence.
Josep Del-Hierro-Dies, J. Sánchez-Cañizares· Scientia et Fides· 0 citations
It is argued that neither moral power requires sentience and that both may in principle be possessed by a non-sentient AI system, and that both may in principle be possessed by a non-sentient AI system.
Ned Howells-Whitaker, Seth Lazar· arXiv.org· 1 citation
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.