Skip to main content

Employing AI for Better Understanding Our Morals

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Machine Ethics

Abstract

Having addressed the prerequisite issues for a justified and contextualized computational morality, the absence of radically new problems resulting from the co-presence of agents of different nature, and addressed the difficulties inherent in the creation of moral algorithms, it is time to present the research we have conducted. The latter considers both the very aspects of programming, as the need for protocols regulating competition among companies or countries. Its aim revolves around a benevolent AI, contributing to the fair distribution of the benefits of development, and attempting to block the tendency towards the concentration of wealth and power. Our approach denounces and avoids the statistical models used to solve moral dilemmas, because they are “blind” and risk perpetuating mistakes. Thus, we use an approach where counterfactual reasoning plays a fundamental role and, considering morality primarily a matter of groups, we present conclusions from studies involving the pairs egoism/altruism; collaboration/competition; acknowledgment of error/apology. These are the basic elements of most moral systems, and studies make it possible to draw generalizable and programmable conclusions in order to attain group sustainability and greater global benefit, regardless of their constituents.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Cherry, T. L., & McEvoy, T. (2017). Enforcing compliance with environmental agreements in the absence of strong institutions: An experimental analysis. Environmental and Resource Economics, 54(1), 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, W. D., & Axelrod, R. (1981). The evolution of cooperation. Science, 211(27), 1390–1396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A. (2016). Emergence of social punishment and cooperation through prior commitments. In Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 2494–2500). Phoenix, Arizona, USA. San Francisco, CA: AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., & Pereira, L. M. (2013a). Context-dependent incremental decision making scrutinizing the intentions of others via bayesian network model construction. Intelligent Decision Technologies, 7(4), 293–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., & Pereira, L. M. (2013b). Intention-based decision making via intention recognition and its applications. Human behavior recognition technologies: Intelligent applications for monitoring and security (pp. 174–211). IGI Global: Hershey, PA.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., & Pereira, L. M. (2013c). State-of-the-art of intention recognition and its use in decision making. AI Communications, 26(2), 237–246.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., & Pereira, L. M. (2019). Evolutionary machine ethics. In O. Bendel (Ed.), Handbuch maschinenethik. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., Pereira, L. M., & Lenaerts, T. (2014). Avoiding or restricting defectors in public goods games? Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 12(103), 20141203.https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.1203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., Pereira, L. M. & Lenaerts, T. (2017a). Evolution of commitment and level of participation in public goods games. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 31(3), 561–583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han, T. A., Pereira, L. M., Martinez-Vaquero L. A., & Lenaerts T. (2017b). Centralized vs. personalized commitments and their influence on cooperation in group interactions. In Proceedings of the 31st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 2999–3005). San Francisco, CA: AAAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, M. (2006). Moral minds: How nature designed our universal sense of right and wrong. New York, NY: Ecco/Harper Collins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Vaquero, L. A., Han, T. A., Pereira, L. M., & Lenaerts, T. (2015). Apology and forgiveness evolve to resolve failures in cooperative agreements. Scientific Reports, 5, 10639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Vaquero, L. A., Han, T. A., Pereira, L. M., & Lenaerts, T. (2017). When agreement-accepting free-riders are a necessary evil for the evolution of cooperation. Scientific Reports, 7, 2478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikhail, J. (2007). Universal moral grammar: Theory, evidence and the future. Trends in cognitive sciences, 11(4), 143–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesse, R. M. (2001). Natural selection and the capacity for subjective commitment. In Evolution and the capacity for commitment (pp. 1–44).

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, J. V., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. A. (2006). Five rules for the evolution of cooperation. Science, 314(5805), 1560–1563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, L. M. (2012a). Turing is among us. Journal of Logic and Computation, 22(6), 1257–1277.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, L. M. (2012b). Evolutionary tolerance. In: L. Magnani & L. Ping (Eds.), Philosophy and cognitive science—Western & eastern studies. SAPERE series (Vol. 2, pp. 263–287). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira, L. M., & Saptawijaya, A. (2016). Programming machine ethics. SAPERE series (Vol. 26). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sigmund, K. (2010). The calculus of selfishness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Trivers, R. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 46(1), 35–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luís Moniz Pereira .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pereira, L.M., Lopes, A.B. (2020). Employing AI for Better Understanding Our Morals. In: Machine Ethics. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, vol 53. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39630-5_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39630-5_17

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-39629-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-39630-5

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics