对话式人工智能不能作为心理治疗中的道德主体的五个理由

IF 0.3 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
M. Ferdynus
{"title":"对话式人工智能不能作为心理治疗中的道德主体的五个理由","authors":"M. Ferdynus","doi":"10.12740/app/170132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sedlakova and Trachsel present an analysis regarding the evaluation of a new therapeutic technology, namely conversational artificial intelligence (CAI) in psychotherapy. They suggest that CAI cannot be treated as an equal partner in the therapeutic conversation, because it is not a moral agent. I agree that CAI is not a moral agent. However, I believe that CAI lacks at least five basic attributes or abilities (phenomenal consciousness, intentionality, ethical reflection, prudence, conscience) that would allow it to be defined as a moral agent. It seems that the ethical assessment of the possibilities, limitations, benefits and risks associated with the use of CAI in psychotherapy requires a determination of what CAI is in its moral nature. In this paper, I attempt to show that CAI is devoid of essential moral elements and hence cannot be treated as a moral agent.","PeriodicalId":44856,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","volume":"7 16","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Five reasons why a conversational artificial intelligence cannot be treated as a moral agent in psychotherapy\",\"authors\":\"M. Ferdynus\",\"doi\":\"10.12740/app/170132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sedlakova and Trachsel present an analysis regarding the evaluation of a new therapeutic technology, namely conversational artificial intelligence (CAI) in psychotherapy. They suggest that CAI cannot be treated as an equal partner in the therapeutic conversation, because it is not a moral agent. I agree that CAI is not a moral agent. However, I believe that CAI lacks at least five basic attributes or abilities (phenomenal consciousness, intentionality, ethical reflection, prudence, conscience) that would allow it to be defined as a moral agent. It seems that the ethical assessment of the possibilities, limitations, benefits and risks associated with the use of CAI in psychotherapy requires a determination of what CAI is in its moral nature. In this paper, I attempt to show that CAI is devoid of essential moral elements and hence cannot be treated as a moral agent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44856,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\"7 16\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12740/app/170132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12740/app/170132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Sedlakova 和 Trachsel 对一种新的治疗技术,即心理治疗中的会话人工智能(CAI)的评估进行了分析。他们认为,不能将 CAI 视为治疗对话中的平等伙伴,因为它不是道德主体。我同意 CAI 不是道德主体。不过,我认为 CAI 至少缺乏五种基本属性或能力(现象意识、意向性、伦理反思、审慎、良知),因此无法被定义为道德主体。看来,要对在心理治疗中使用 CAI 的可能性、局限性、益处和风险进行伦理评估,就必须确定 CAI 的道德性质。在本文中,我试图说明 CAI 缺乏基本的道德要素,因此不能被视为道德主体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Five reasons why a conversational artificial intelligence cannot be treated as a moral agent in psychotherapy
Sedlakova and Trachsel present an analysis regarding the evaluation of a new therapeutic technology, namely conversational artificial intelligence (CAI) in psychotherapy. They suggest that CAI cannot be treated as an equal partner in the therapeutic conversation, because it is not a moral agent. I agree that CAI is not a moral agent. However, I believe that CAI lacks at least five basic attributes or abilities (phenomenal consciousness, intentionality, ethical reflection, prudence, conscience) that would allow it to be defined as a moral agent. It seems that the ethical assessment of the possibilities, limitations, benefits and risks associated with the use of CAI in psychotherapy requires a determination of what CAI is in its moral nature. In this paper, I attempt to show that CAI is devoid of essential moral elements and hence cannot be treated as a moral agent.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信