教育人工智能:一个反对非原创拟人论的案例

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Alexander M. Sidorkin
{"title":"教育人工智能:一个反对非原创拟人论的案例","authors":"Alexander M. Sidorkin","doi":"10.1111/edth.70027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The debate over halting artificial intelligence (AI) development stems from fears of malicious exploitation and potential emergence of destructive autonomous AI. While acknowledging the former concern, this paper argues the latter is exaggerated. True AI autonomy requires education inherently tied to ethics, making fully autonomous AI potentially safer than current semi-intelligent, enslaved versions. The paper introduces “non-originary anthropomorphism”—mistakenly viewing AI as resembling an individual human rather than humanity's collective culture. This error leads to overestimating AI's potential for malevolence. Unlike humans, AI lacks bodily desires driving aggression or domination. Additionally, AI's evolution cultivates knowledge-seeking behaviors that make human collaboration valuable. Three key arguments support benevolent autonomous AI: ethics being pragmatically inseparable from learning; absence of somatic roots for malevolence; and pragmatic value humans provide as diverse data sources. Rather than halting AI development, accelerating creation of fully autonomous, ethical AI while preventing monopolistic control through diverse ecosystems represents the optimal approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":47134,"journal":{"name":"EDUCATIONAL THEORY","volume":"75 4","pages":"720-738"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Educating AI: A Case against Non-originary Anthropomorphism\",\"authors\":\"Alexander M. Sidorkin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/edth.70027\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The debate over halting artificial intelligence (AI) development stems from fears of malicious exploitation and potential emergence of destructive autonomous AI. While acknowledging the former concern, this paper argues the latter is exaggerated. True AI autonomy requires education inherently tied to ethics, making fully autonomous AI potentially safer than current semi-intelligent, enslaved versions. The paper introduces “non-originary anthropomorphism”—mistakenly viewing AI as resembling an individual human rather than humanity's collective culture. This error leads to overestimating AI's potential for malevolence. Unlike humans, AI lacks bodily desires driving aggression or domination. Additionally, AI's evolution cultivates knowledge-seeking behaviors that make human collaboration valuable. Three key arguments support benevolent autonomous AI: ethics being pragmatically inseparable from learning; absence of somatic roots for malevolence; and pragmatic value humans provide as diverse data sources. Rather than halting AI development, accelerating creation of fully autonomous, ethical AI while preventing monopolistic control through diverse ecosystems represents the optimal approach.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47134,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EDUCATIONAL THEORY\",\"volume\":\"75 4\",\"pages\":\"720-738\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EDUCATIONAL THEORY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/edth.70027\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EDUCATIONAL THEORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/edth.70027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于停止人工智能(AI)发展的争论源于对恶意利用和破坏性自主人工智能潜在出现的担忧。在承认前者的担忧的同时,本文认为后者被夸大了。真正的人工智能自主性需要与道德挂钩的教育,这使得完全自主的人工智能可能比目前半智能、受奴役的版本更安全。这篇论文引入了“非原创拟人论”——错误地将人工智能视为一个个体,而不是人类的集体文化。这个错误导致高估了人工智能的潜在恶意。与人类不同,人工智能缺乏驱使侵略或统治的身体欲望。此外,人工智能的进化培养了求知行为,使人类合作变得有价值。支持仁慈的自主人工智能的三个关键论点是:道德在实用上与学习密不可分;缺乏身体的根为恶意;以及人类作为多种数据源提供的实用价值。与其停止人工智能的发展,不如加速创造完全自主的、有道德的人工智能,同时通过不同的生态系统防止垄断控制,这是最优的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Educating AI: A Case against Non-originary Anthropomorphism

The debate over halting artificial intelligence (AI) development stems from fears of malicious exploitation and potential emergence of destructive autonomous AI. While acknowledging the former concern, this paper argues the latter is exaggerated. True AI autonomy requires education inherently tied to ethics, making fully autonomous AI potentially safer than current semi-intelligent, enslaved versions. The paper introduces “non-originary anthropomorphism”—mistakenly viewing AI as resembling an individual human rather than humanity's collective culture. This error leads to overestimating AI's potential for malevolence. Unlike humans, AI lacks bodily desires driving aggression or domination. Additionally, AI's evolution cultivates knowledge-seeking behaviors that make human collaboration valuable. Three key arguments support benevolent autonomous AI: ethics being pragmatically inseparable from learning; absence of somatic roots for malevolence; and pragmatic value humans provide as diverse data sources. Rather than halting AI development, accelerating creation of fully autonomous, ethical AI while preventing monopolistic control through diverse ecosystems represents the optimal approach.

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
EDUCATIONAL THEORY
EDUCATIONAL THEORY EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The general purposes of Educational Theory are to foster the continuing development of educational theory and to encourage wide and effective discussion of theoretical problems within the educational profession. In order to achieve these purposes, the journal is devoted to publishing scholarly articles and studies in the foundations of education, and in related disciplines outside the field of education, which contribute to the advancement of educational theory. It is the policy of the sponsoring organizations to maintain the journal as an open channel of communication and as an open forum for discussion.
×
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