tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.comments2023-10-11T09:41:19.089+02:00Philosophical CommentChristian Munthehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03373442927438898939noreply@blogger.comBlogger525125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-21906515687270713362017-07-09T00:57:40.914+02:002017-07-09T00:57:40.914+02:00good!!!!good!!!!tokyodvdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18067741516812721683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-64761645395809518922017-02-20T16:56:39.797+01:002017-02-20T16:56:39.797+01:00WowWowAndyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01582628009777569519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-24081143551648629062017-02-20T16:17:28.272+01:002017-02-20T16:17:28.272+01:00A problem with Trump is that he says and does so m...A problem with Trump is that he says and does so many dumb and/or bad things and he has some many flaws - intellectual, temperamental, moral - that it is impossible to keep them all in the head at the same time. One simply gets overloaded. Lars Karlssonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06158469980966810882noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-84234045549729548122017-01-31T18:58:25.585+01:002017-01-31T18:58:25.585+01:00It's such a shame to lose someone with his kin...It's such a shame to lose someone with his kind of unique understanding and outlook, at such a young age.Alice Lesagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07807951245995868112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-84650859353517636302017-01-24T12:24:52.497+01:002017-01-24T12:24:52.497+01:00i seei seeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-9603892816176186122016-12-31T10:30:44.600+01:002016-12-31T10:30:44.600+01:00My stance: The comments I wrote in the PDF-file we...My stance: The comments I wrote in the PDF-file were probably not all that helpful, since I made the mistake of mixing constructive thoughts on the article’s disposition with critiques of the various quotes from my own (unarticulated) position. Sorry ’bout that.<br /><br />For what it’s worth, I find most of the non-functional discussion uninteresting - regardless of whether it pertains to human or to artificial intelligence, consciousness etc. My own background in comp. sci. has left me highly skeptical of anything OTHER than a computational theory of mind (CTOM) and I find most people, including philosophers, acting on what is really nothing more than a sense of entitlement and disgust when they exclude features such as intelligence or consciousness from non-human entities. Most don’t even do a good job of rationalizing their position from already preconceived notions. And most don’t present, or even feel the need to present, proper reasons for assigning humans a unique (and unattainable) position.<br /><br />From my perspective, ”intelligence” would amount to something like flexible goal-attainment. ”Consciousness”, to the extent that is even ”a thing”, is probably a bi-product of certain (but not all) sufficiently complex computational systems; to the extent that you count qualia as (a necessary) part of consciousness, they may be (possibly necessary) means to effect certain (more or less crucial) actions.<br /><br />To my mind, neither intelligence nor consciousness is needed for agency. Intelligence (in a limited sense), but not consciousness, is needed for responsibility. I’m not sure about the significance of putting the word ”moral” in front of ”agency” or ”responsibility”.<br /><br />”Free will” is conceptually hollow, regardless of whether it pertains to humans or artificial agents, and regardless of whether you assume a deterministic or a non-deterministic world-view: If actions are ”free” in the sense of being uncoupled from any or all causality, then they are more or less random and as such they cannot be ascribed to an agent, even if they emanate (in some sense) from that agent.<br /><br />I assume a deterministic world (for now). For me, that implies that not even humans, ultimately, can be held responsible for their actions. Moral responsibility may be a conceptual impossibility, but (for now) we seem to need at least legal responsibility in order to reason about and arrange our societies. I am not convinced of Dennett et al’s brand of compatibilism, but I am open to the possibility of defining a coherent notion of ”volitional action” for which it makes (the best possible) sense to assign legal responsibility.<br /><br />Such responsibility hinges on an agent’s capability of building and adhering to a model of rules for action, as well as the capability of adapting its behavior in accordance with ”praise” and ”blame”. This does not necessarily involve corresponding feelings or states of ”shame” or ”pride”.<br /><br />When it comes to foresight (planning, ”imagination”, theory of mind…) I note that humans are capable of only limited foresight when it comes to the consequences of our actions. There seems to be no clear way of drawing the line for what constitutes a sufficient feel of foresight, in order to meet out responsibility.bjornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09100115733732998284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-28044313786994407732016-12-31T10:30:34.029+01:002016-12-31T10:30:34.029+01:00Common / accepted positions in discussions of non-...Common / accepted positions in discussions of non-artificial entities: I guess your work as a philosopher is first and foremost to develop a solid framework for discussion. Once that is done, philosophers, computer scientists, cognitive psychologists and everyone else can present and discuss their positions effectively and efficiently. I am not a moral philosopher but I suspect that much (most?) of this work has already been done, when it comes to non-artificial agents, that is, humans. I also suspect that most, if not all, of the discussion concerning artificial agency is (merely) an extension of earlier work. My hunch is that is more like the top of an existing iceberg, rather than a new iceberg unto itself. My feeling when reading some of the quotes in your paper was that the discussion was (a) unclear with regards to unstated assumptions, but also that it (2) seemed to run ”in parallell”, as it were, to traditional ethics, effectively neglecting to position itself firmly within an existing framework and then extending it (only) as needed to handle also artificial entities.<br /><br />Your own stance: Is not strictly needed, of course, but it would be nice to see you developing your own position within the framework you develop and propose. It would serve to illustrate the framework itself, but also actually exhibit a coherent and hopefully practically useful stance towards the issue, from which concrete measures may be inferred.bjornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09100115733732998284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-23934236590490906472016-12-31T10:30:09.060+01:002016-12-31T10:30:09.060+01:00Concepts: artificial, autonomous, embodied, physic...Concepts: artificial, autonomous, embodied, physical, complicated, hardware, software, implementation-independent, biological, mechanical, material-independent, (classically) computable, Turing-equivalent, quantum, planning, problem-solving, deciding, anticipating, rich world-model, input, output, adjustable, self-adjustable, learning, opaque *, thinking, intelligent, conscious, free will, ability to accept praise or blame, ability to cause or feel pain, remorse or pride (qualia), action, physical, virtual, relating to humans, (moral) agency, (moral / legal) responsibility, justice: retributive, corrective……..<br /><br />(* I’m thinking here of, e.g., self-learning software that develops large and complex ”neural” networks which encode say, accurate face recognition. It is impossible for the developers or anyone looking ”under the hood” to anticipate, interpret or understand that ”knowledge” once it is developed by the system. Another example is so called evolutionary algorithms.)<br /><br />Questions and relationships: The list of concepts (above) is not complete, and different authors may emphasize different things. Some will focus on the details of one or more of these concepts and develop further distinctions. But I think it is a good idea to strive for, and to try to interpret, any position (vector) as the result of (i) some axioms and (ii) reasoning. Doing so allows one to categorize different positions. Examples of axioms could be: autonomous (in some specified sense) entities have (moral) agency; no artificial system could ever be conscious; a creator of a tool is always (or never!) morally responsible for its uses…….. Examples of reasoning could be: any entity that violates rules which it demonstrably has the ability to access and follow is morally culpable of neglect, regardless of implementation - thus, our dog is morally responsible for biting the neighbors little girl; There is no such thing as ”free will” since everything is determined - thus the lunatic who shot 15 people cannot be blamed for what he did (but we should imprison him anyway)……..bjornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09100115733732998284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-15358930168875496312016-12-31T10:29:45.089+01:002016-12-31T10:29:45.089+01:00Now what do I mean by framework, exactly? Well, it...Now what do I mean by framework, exactly? Well, it seems to me that there are several, interrelated concepts and questions here, many of which are often left unstated. My immediate instinct is to draw up a (multidimensional) matrix (no pun intended) to clarify any and all possible combination of (potentially) relevant factors.<br /><br />For simplicity, I assume that all concepts are binary, that is, they either apply or they don’t (0 or 1) - there are no intermediate states. All relevant concepts are listed in some fixed order, yielding an index. Then, any combination of positions with regard to these concepts can be represented by a vector of length n, where n i s the number of relevant concepts, yielding 2^n possible combinations. (Some pruning can probably be done, I’m sure, as some combinations are too unlikely.)<br /><br />A vector could, for instance, be regarded as answering one of two questions: What does it take to be a moral agent? What does it take to be morally responsible? Who (if not the agent itself) is responsible? (There are other ways of using and interpreting the matrix.)<br /><br />The first thing one should ask of any contribution to the field is: What is their vector? Many will not have have filled in every slot with either a 0 or a 1. They should! Some may be able to do so, but haven’t yet done it explicitly. They should!<br /><br />The next step is to ask each contributor why some slots are filled but others are not. Is there a reason that some slots have a specific value, and how (if at all) does it relate to other slots? This line of questioning will, in effect, tease out both (a) the assumptions and (b) the reasoning behind the position of the contribution.<br /><br />One could, for instance, take the position that no artificial (made by humans) entity could ever be conscious (regardless of how it is built) as an axiom; and reason from there that conscious entities are (or are not!) always moral agents. Etc.bjornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09100115733732998284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-33524031088686126912016-12-31T10:29:18.574+01:002016-12-31T10:29:18.574+01:00Machines and morals
Here are some thoughts ”off t...Machines and morals<br /><br />Here are some thoughts ”off the cuff”, loosely related to your paper, a few days after having read it (once).<br /><br />First of all, I found most of the texts quoted in the paper quite confused, especially those that appear in the first part.<br /><br />I guess that was the point: 1) to demonstrate the current state of discourse; 2) to point out that it lacks and needs more rigor; 3) to reason that it is possible to make it more rigorous; 4) to show this by giving some examples.<br /><br />Are there other, better, examples in the field so far?<br /><br />Further aims could be to 5) present a (complete) framework for (every future contribution to) the discourse; and 6) to present (fictive) examples of how such contributions would / should be structured. This would likely also include 7) a tighter connection to (the volumes of) previous work in philosophy not dealing explicitly with (only) artificial entities (but instead mostly concentrating on humans).<br /><br />Having come that far, one could also 8) evaluate previous texts on how well they fit in to your framework, or even how clearly and how exhaustively they present their own explicit framework. You could also 9) suggest your own concrete answers to each question in your framework.<br /><br />Anyway, I would suggest restructuring the paper in a more constructive way: Begin with your contributions; your framework; your suggestions. Only then, exhibit and discuss (snippets) of other texts, and show how they fall short, by not adhering to your framework.<br /><br />For most texts, those that seem far from fitting into the framework, this discussion should probably be limited to isolated details (lest it gets out of hand). Hopefully you can find other texts that either explicitly presents something relatively close to your framework, or can be interpreted to fit more or less within it.<br />bjornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09100115733732998284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-36296379662388393192016-12-30T17:22:20.076+01:002016-12-30T17:22:20.076+01:00Thanks, Björn! Dorna and I will look at it when we...Thanks, Björn! Dorna and I will look at it when we get the review reports back ...Christian Munthehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03373442927438898939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-23896219364413894432016-12-27T18:19:34.471+01:002016-12-27T18:19:34.471+01:00I have e-mailed you a copy with my comments, for w...I have e-mailed you a copy with my comments, for what they're worth.bjornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09100115733732998284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-8848461556396001712016-11-28T12:22:55.943+01:002016-11-28T12:22:55.943+01:00I can only say that the center were im working pre...I can only say that the center were im working presently is in the area of systems biology and a member of the evaluation papel was a civil engenieer ! Thats the ESF standardsCatatan Ernesthttp://www.catatanernest.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-10217907108435299932016-10-31T20:10:34.028+01:002016-10-31T20:10:34.028+01:00One of the weird implications of the statement is ...One of the weird implications of the statement is that point 2 would require doctors to start and continue CPR and other intensive life-sustaining treatments on patients whenever their proxies ask, even if the physician judges it to be unethical. And then point 6 would imply that every hospital must have an intensivist on hand that is willing to go to extreme lengths to sustain life at the request of patients and their substitute decision makers, even if all of their colleagues think they are wasting resources better spent on other patients. Despite point 7, this statement could end up costing healthcare systems a lot more than it saves.HDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05882531381665520756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-89371015228301713802016-10-08T12:54:31.883+02:002016-10-08T12:54:31.883+02:00There was an anounymous comment to this post that ...There was an anounymous comment to this post that I accedentally deleted when attempting to approve it for publishing. The Blogger tool alas does not have a function for repairing such mistakes.<br /><br />Anyway: the comment was a question, namely, if Swedish doctors had the possibility to resist participating in the compulsory sterilization program run in my country 1935-75. The answer is that the situation was the same then as it is today, which I describe closely in an article that's just been published by the Journal of Medical Ethics: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304062329_Conscientious_refusal_in_healthcare_The_Swedish_solution<br /><br />That is, there was, as it is now, ample opportunities for doctors to follow their conscience. However then, as now, there existed no privileged exemption from applicable law for doctors. If it had, would it have made a difference to the compulsory strerilization practice? Most likely not, as this practice enjoyed strong support from the medical profession.Christian Munthehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03373442927438898939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-61559995663596165812016-08-25T04:25:43.042+02:002016-08-25T04:25:43.042+02:00How does any of this apply to death? How does any of this apply to death? Unknown Soldierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00796210982427639682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-56040234053923491972016-08-11T12:54:20.114+02:002016-08-11T12:54:20.114+02:00This everyone can agree on. But what would you say...This everyone can agree on. But what would you say of a case of a person just below the legal age of adulthood (say, a person aged 20 in a 21-adulthood state) requested medically assisted dying. Would it then be child abuse to deny this request?Christian Munthehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03373442927438898939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-47496638648530535962016-08-05T01:37:16.702+02:002016-08-05T01:37:16.702+02:00Let's start with a crucial question:
What sho...Let's start with a crucial question:<br /><br />What should be done with a president caught by committing a crime?<br /><br />If you prefer to call coup the replacement ofa President in this condition, that is so. In Brazil, the Constitution provides that the President caught making a crime shall be replaced by the Vice President, specially when the Vice President received the same votes as the President. Thus in Brazil.<br /><br />In your introduction you claim that Dilma was accused of committing the same crimes than their predecessors. This is probably due to their lack of legal dynamics in our country, which is perfectly understandable.<br /><br />What you do not know is that the law establishing the tax liability of the President, to which Rousseff is accused of cheating, was sanctioned only 1 year before Luís Inácio "Lula" da Silva took office. So if any President before Dilma ripping off this law was Lula, since we can not accuse the previous Presidents have circumvented a law that did not exist. There is no crime where there is no law guiding the proceedings. The problem is that he has not been caught committing the crime, mainly due to his acts against the law of responsibility have been on a much smaller scale than that of Dilma Rousseff made it difficult to be detected crime. In fact we still would not knew that Lula has committed such crimes, if Dilma had not reported it to his defense.<br /><br />About Michel Temer be suspected of corruption, it is because he and his party have been next to Dilma Rousseff throughout a term. It is a logical conclusion that is not necessarily supported by some act actually committed by him. Fearing therefore part of the group that supported the President Dilma Rousseff, not opposition to Rousseff as his article mistakenly makes it seem.<br /><br />Perhaps you are confusing Michel Temer with Eduardo Cunha, who was the President of the Chamber of Deputies and by chance also belongs to the party of the Vice President. Yes, he was being formally accused of having committed acts of corruption, and even has been put away from the House.<br /><br />However here it is a clarification of the fundamental role played by Eduardo Cunha in the case of impeachment. Cunha was not the proponent of the impeachment process. It turns out that one of the President of Chamber of Deputies functions is to receive requests for impeachment against the President, since exist in the request text evidence of crime committed by the President.<br /><br />Regardless of the charges against Eduardo Cunha, and for which he is already responding, he had no choice but to accept the request once met the legal requirements for acceptance. And that's what he did, constrained by the facts related in the application submitted by voters not only unhappy, but shocked by the fact that the President has committed crimes against the state. These crimes that contributed to dive Brazil in the worst economic and political crisis in its history.<br /><br />I sincerely hope to have been able to contribute to a better understanding of what is happening in our country.<br />Paulo Gomeshttp://www.forjadehefestos.com.brnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-61283672692320750792016-07-31T05:28:18.660+02:002016-07-31T05:28:18.660+02:00Each and everyone must understand that children sh...Each and everyone must understand that <a href="https://www.hopeforchildrenfoundation.org" rel="nofollow">children</a> should be loved and taken care of. They must not be abused.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359145251648783554noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-63075605188022277102016-07-23T02:40:09.256+02:002016-07-23T02:40:09.256+02:00KoolKoolBmachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01774428061739603222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-50100327721590915142016-07-10T10:04:24.118+02:002016-07-10T10:04:24.118+02:00mismanaged the economy badly to lose popularity. -...mismanaged the economy badly to lose popularity. ->>> this really happen?Rachmad Imam Tarechahttp://rachmadimamtarecha.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-22956389300691935512016-07-09T12:38:05.795+02:002016-07-09T12:38:05.795+02:00There is a Dramatic twist in the events sir.... I ...There is a Dramatic twist in the events sir.... I can smell betrayal and insincerity. Also, Gender inequality plays a role here.. The woman is always the victim. <br />Ashibuogwu Emeka Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18389881526789882602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-85273026502177158562016-06-27T02:10:42.048+02:002016-06-27T02:10:42.048+02:00AwesomeAwesomePES 2017http://reviewandhowtoplay.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-92103917908601045592016-06-22T21:14:40.465+02:002016-06-22T21:14:40.465+02:00Hi! I am a brazillian and i have to tell you that ...Hi! I am a brazillian and i have to tell you that this type of political problems is very common. The corrupt system of brazil alows that technalities can be use to exume people from legal cases as such now that is call by the media and federal police as "big oil" fraud.<br />Brasil has a problem with corruption in high and low levels of the government, including the police itself.Marcelo L de Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08800448683273375966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6763377479629539589.post-90250664414288697642016-06-14T06:27:09.341+02:002016-06-14T06:27:09.341+02:00I agree that you have the better solution to their...I agree that you have the better solution to their idea that failure for students will result in shame and degradation.. A culture more open about the attempts that we have towards goals and their successive failures is an easier and probably more effective route to take than the 1% of those who actually receive these grants and graduate degrees attempting to inspire through a list of their own failures. Thank you, good post. Nick Risohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10784738058290398129noreply@blogger.com