On the computational complexity of ethics: moral tractability for minds and machines

Author:

Stenseke JakobORCID

Abstract

AbstractWhy should moral philosophers, moral psychologists, and machine ethicists care about computational complexity? Debates on whether artificial intelligence (AI) can or should be used to solve problems in ethical domains have mainly been driven by what AI can or cannot do in terms of human capacities. In this paper, we tackle the problem from the other end by exploring what kind of moral machines are possible based on what computational systems can or cannot do. To do so, we analyze normative ethics through the lens of computational complexity. First, we introduce computational complexity for the uninitiated reader and discuss how the complexity of ethical problems can be framed within Marr’s three levels of analysis. We then study a range of ethical problems based on consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, with the aim of elucidating the complexity associated with the problems themselves (e.g., due to combinatorics, uncertainty, strategic dynamics), the computational methods employed (e.g., probability, logic, learning), and the available resources (e.g., time, knowledge, learning). The results indicate that most problems the normative frameworks pose lead to tractability issues in every category analyzed. Our investigation also provides several insights about the computational nature of normative ethics, including the differences between rule- and outcome-based moral strategies, and the implementation-variance with regard to moral resources. We then discuss the consequences complexity results have for the prospect of moral machines in virtue of the trade-off between optimality and efficiency. Finally, we elucidate how computational complexity can be used to inform both philosophical and cognitive-psychological research on human morality by advancing the moral tractability thesis.

Funder

Marcus och Amalia Wallenbergs minnesfond

Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation

Lund University

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference405 articles.

1. Aaronson S (2013) Why philosophers should care about computational complexity. Comput Tur Gödel Church Beyond 261:327

2. Abdelbar AM, Hedetniemi SM (1998) Approximating maps for belief networks is np-hard and other theorems. Artif Intell 102:21–38

3. Abel D, MacGlashan J, Littman ML (2016) Reinforcement learning as a framework for ethical decision making, In: AAAI workshop: AI, ethics, and society, Phoenix, AZ, pp 02

4. Abiteboul S, Vardi MY, Vianu V (1997) Fixpoint logics, relational machines, and computational complexity. J ACM (JACM) 44:30–56

5. Adam SP, Alexandropoulos SAN, Pardalos PM, Vrahatis MN (2019) No free lunch theorem: a review. In: Demetriou I, Pardalos P (eds) Approximation and optimization. Springer, Cham

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3