Am I talking to a human or a machine?
The highly esteemed science journalist, physicist, and presenter Ranga Yogeshwar sparked a new discussion on the topic of Artificial Intelligence with a guest article in the feuilleton of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung in mid-January. The trigger was Google's developed voice assistant Duplex, which sounds like a human on the phone and can spontaneously react to unexpected responses from its conversation partner.
Initially, my first thought was that I would surely notice immediately if I was dealing with a machine and not a human being on the other end of the line. However, I quickly revised this assessment when I listened to the recording of two such human-machine phone calls on YouTube.
Technological Progress Requires Ethical Progress
I believe that technological progress cannot be stopped. And that's a good thing! The real challenge lies in the responsible use of technology. By that, I don't just mean the currently much-discussed Artificial Intelligence, but any kind of technological development that requires responsible behavior.
A friend once aptly put it this way: "In every kitchen, you will find a large, sharp knife. But that doesn't mean that people are constantly being killed with it." In other words, in some areas, we already handle potentially dangerous situations quite reliably. But when there are new developments, we are challenged to further refine our ethical understanding.
So, the question arises of whether and how certain technologies should be used. What is right? What is wrong? Which purpose justifies which means here?
Extrinsic Motivation Has Limits
In society, one could, of course, try to draft endless discussions, essays, and codes of conduct, whose enforcement would need to be monitored and violations appropriately punished. Targeted incentive systems can also promote supposedly correct behaviors. To exaggerate: "If you refrain from touching the rocket trigger, you will later receive a large portion of your favorite dessert."
The metaphor "carrot and stick" is a catchy synonym for extrinsic motivation. But this works at best only as long as the overseers have enough carrots and remain fully attentive with the stick in hand. But do we really want to rely on that?
Intrinsic Motivation for Ethics & Responsible Behavior
It would be much easier, practical, and safer if every person acted correctly from within - that is, intrinsically motivated, right?
But what is right? Perhaps the well-known ego-centric saying "If everyone thinks of themselves, then everyone is taken care of" unexpectedly points us in the right direction. Thinking of oneself seems to be a pronounced intrinsic motivation of us humans, especially in today's time. What is good for us and does not harm us, we subjectively consider as right.
This means that our own ego and our self-preservation instinct provide a solid intrinsic yardstick, at least for our individual sense of right or wrong. We would know quite well what we would do or not do if we were to experience the consequences of our behavior directly on our own bodies. Apart from a few psychopathological exceptions: Who would forcefully plunge the large, sharp kitchen knife into their own thigh? I believe no one would.
So, we do possess a strong intrinsic motivation for correct and responsible actions. The actual problem is that we generally do not view our fellow human beings and/or the environment as our own thigh.
A Thought Experiment
What if we lived with an awareness that the supposed separation between me and my surroundings does not actually exist upon closer examination?
Assuming that a growing awareness and understanding of the mechanisms of our reality would lead us to perceive the "Others" as a part of ourselves (see "thigh"). Then we would have the necessary intrinsic motivation for ethical behavior and we would automatically handle new technologies (e.g. Artificial Intelligence) responsibly.
So, the question ultimately remains whether it is just a thought experiment. Perhaps we are currently on the threshold of a scientific revolution that could fundamentally change our understanding of reality and self. Recognizing and accelerating such a paradigm shift would be an interesting and innovative approach to dealing with new technologies and challenges of our society.
Author: Carsten Ohrmann www.CarstenOhrmann.com
