Shannon Vallor's Wise Polemic against AI Enthusiasm

IF 2.3 3区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Erik Parens
{"title":"Shannon Vallor's Wise Polemic against AI Enthusiasm","authors":"Erik Parens","doi":"10.1002/hast.70019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>In</i> The AI Mirror: How to Reclaim Our Humanity in an Age of Machine Thinking, <i>Shannon Vallor excavates the moral significance of the difference between experiences such as cognition, empathy, and love that emerge in embodied beings like us, and simulacra of those experiences as produced by bodiless systems like generative AIs. She argues, helpfully and powerfully, that there is no greater existential threat to humanity than failing to remember and preserve that difference</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":55073,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Center Report","volume":"55 5","pages":"43-45"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Center Report","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.70019","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In The AI Mirror: How to Reclaim Our Humanity in an Age of Machine Thinking, Shannon Vallor excavates the moral significance of the difference between experiences such as cognition, empathy, and love that emerge in embodied beings like us, and simulacra of those experiences as produced by bodiless systems like generative AIs. She argues, helpfully and powerfully, that there is no greater existential threat to humanity than failing to remember and preserve that difference.

Abstract Image

香农·瓦洛对人工智能热情的明智反驳
在《人工智能之镜:如何在机器思维时代重塑我们的人性》一书中,香农·瓦洛尔(Shannon Vallor)挖掘了认知、同理心和爱等体验与非实体系统(如生成式人工智能)产生的这些体验的模拟之间差异的道德意义。她有力地提出,对人类来说,最大的生存威胁莫过于不能记住并保持这种差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hastings Center Report
Hastings Center Report 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Hastings Center Report explores ethical, legal, and social issues in medicine, health care, public health, and the life sciences. Six issues per year offer articles, essays, case studies of bioethical problems, columns on law and policy, caregivers’ stories, peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and book reviews. Authors come from an assortment of professions and academic disciplines and express a range of perspectives and political opinions. The Report’s readership includes physicians, nurses, scholars, administrators, social workers, health lawyers, and others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信