Societal and technological progress as sewing an ever-growing, ever-changing, patchy, and polychrome quilt
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.05197v1
- Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 12:55:07 GMT
- Title: Societal and technological progress as sewing an ever-growing, ever-changing, patchy, and polychrome quilt
- Authors: Joel Z. Leibo, Alexander Sasha Vezhnevets, William A. Cunningham, Sébastien Krier, Manfred Diaz, Simon Osindero,
- Abstract summary: We are worried that such systems, which overlook enduring moral diversity, will spark resistance, erode trust, and destabilize our institutions.<n>This paper traces the underlying problem to an often-unstated Axiom of Rational Convergence: the idea that under ideal conditions, rational agents will converge in the limit of conversation on a single ethics.<n>Treating that premise as both optional and doubtful, we propose what we call the appropriateness framework: an alternative approach grounded in conflict theory, cultural evolution, multi-agent systems, and institutional economics.
- Score: 44.522343543870804
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly placed in positions where their decisions have real consequences, e.g., moderating online spaces, conducting research, and advising on policy. Ensuring they operate in a safe and ethically acceptable fashion is thus critical. However, most solutions have been a form of one-size-fits-all "alignment". We are worried that such systems, which overlook enduring moral diversity, will spark resistance, erode trust, and destabilize our institutions. This paper traces the underlying problem to an often-unstated Axiom of Rational Convergence: the idea that under ideal conditions, rational agents will converge in the limit of conversation on a single ethics. Treating that premise as both optional and doubtful, we propose what we call the appropriateness framework: an alternative approach grounded in conflict theory, cultural evolution, multi-agent systems, and institutional economics. The appropriateness framework treats persistent disagreement as the normal case and designs for it by applying four principles: (1) contextual grounding, (2) community customization, (3) continual adaptation, and (4) polycentric governance. We argue here that adopting these design principles is a good way to shift the main alignment metaphor from moral unification to a more productive metaphor of conflict management, and that taking this step is both desirable and urgent.
Related papers
- Resource Rational Contractualism Should Guide AI Alignment [69.07915246220985]
Contractualist alignment proposes grounding decisions in agreements that diverse stakeholders would endorse.<n>We propose Resource-Rationalism: a framework where AI systems approximate the agreements rational parties would form.<n>An RRC-aligned agent would not only operate efficiently, but also be equipped to dynamically adapt to and interpret the ever-changing human social world.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-06-20T18:57:13Z) - Disentangling AI Alignment: A Structured Taxonomy Beyond Safety and Ethics [0.0]
We develop a structured conceptual framework for understanding AI alignment.<n>Rather than focusing solely on alignment goals, we introduce a taxonomy distinguishing the alignment aim (safety, ethicality, legality, etc.), scope (outcome vs. execution), and constituency (individual vs. collective)<n>This structural approach reveals multiple legitimate alignment configurations, providing a foundation for practical and philosophical integration across domains.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-05-02T20:45:52Z) - Beyond Preferences in AI Alignment [15.878773061188516]
We characterize and challenge the preferentist approach to AI alignment.
We show how preferences fail to capture the thick semantic content of human values.
We argue that AI systems should be aligned with normative standards appropriate to their social roles.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-08-30T03:14:20Z) - Artificial intelligence, rationalization, and the limits of control in the public sector: the case of tax policy optimization [0.0]
We show how much of the criticisms directed towards AI systems spring from well known tensions at the heart of Weberian rationalization.
Our analysis shows that building a machine-like tax system that promotes social and economic equality is possible.
It also highlights that AI driven policy optimization comes at the exclusion of other competing political values.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-07T11:54:14Z) - Dynamic Normativity: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Value Alignment [0.0]
We find "alignment" a problem related to the challenges of expressing human goals and values in a manner that artificial systems can follow without leading to unwanted adversarial effects.
This work addresses alignment as a technical-philosophical problem that requires solid philosophical foundations and practical implementations that bring normative theory to AI system development.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-16T18:37:31Z) - Towards Responsible AI in Banking: Addressing Bias for Fair
Decision-Making [69.44075077934914]
"Responsible AI" emphasizes the critical nature of addressing biases within the development of a corporate culture.
This thesis is structured around three fundamental pillars: understanding bias, mitigating bias, and accounting for bias.
In line with open-source principles, we have released Bias On Demand and FairView as accessible Python packages.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-13T14:07:09Z) - Hybrid Approaches for Moral Value Alignment in AI Agents: a Manifesto [3.7414804164475983]
Increasing interest in ensuring the safety of next-generation Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems calls for novel approaches to embedding morality into autonomous agents.<n>We provide a systematization of existing approaches to the problem of introducing morality in machines - modelled as a continuum.<n>We argue that more hybrid solutions are needed to create adaptable and robust, yet controllable and interpretable agentic systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-04T11:46:34Z) - AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Survey [69.61425542486275]
AI alignment aims to make AI systems behave in line with human intentions and values.<n>We identify four principles as the key objectives of AI alignment: Robustness, Interpretability, Controllability, and Ethicality.<n>We decompose current alignment research into two key components: forward alignment and backward alignment.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-30T15:52:15Z) - Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary
Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them.
We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives.
We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z) - End-to-End Learning and Intervention in Games [60.41921763076017]
We provide a unified framework for learning and intervention in games.
We propose two approaches, respectively based on explicit and implicit differentiation.
The analytical results are validated using several real-world problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-26T18:39:32Z) - Learning from Learning Machines: Optimisation, Rules, and Social Norms [91.3755431537592]
It appears that the area of AI that is most analogous to the behaviour of economic entities is that of morally good decision-making.
Recent successes of deep learning for AI suggest that more implicit specifications work better than explicit ones for solving such problems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2019-12-29T17:42:06Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.