Events

How can we ensure that we remain in control of the technology we create?
How can technology be designed and deployed in ways that support and enhance human autonomy, rather than diminish it?
Can technology enhance our autonomy or help us transcend our limitations?
Might there even be scenarios where reducing human autonomy is beneficial in light of our limitations?
When and why does technology pose a risk of manipulation?

Why is Epistemic Autonomy Valuable in the Age of AI?

1. Understanding vs. Information
2. Responsibility and Moral Agency
3. Resistance to Manipulation
4. Democratic Integrity
5. Intellectual Flourishing

So Why Not Just Let AI Think for Us?

6th Conference on the Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence, an event designed to explore the philosophical implications and challenges presented by artificial intelligence:
AI and Authorship
AI and consciousness
The future of work in an AI-driven economy
The philosophical underpinnings of machine learning
Autonomy, responsibility, and AI
The nature of intelligence: Human vs. Artificial
Bias, fairness, and transparency in AI systems
AI and influence on belief, evidence, intellectual character

In conversation with Jennifer Lackey at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Jennifer Lackey explores how storytelling, particularly in the American criminal legal system, can inflict epistemic wrongs by creating flat, one-dimensional narratives that distort or conceal the truth about individuals. Lackey argues that epistemic reparations, including the creation of counter-stories, are necessary to address these injustices. This is illustrated through examples of defendants whose identities are reduced to their criminal acts, exacerbated by media portrayals and systemic limitations on their ability to share their own perspectives.

'Reevaluating epistemic autonomy in the digital age: from social media to generative AI'

Teaching Philosophy of AI at The New School in New York offered an exploration of how artificial intelligence is reshaping our relationship with knowledge and creativity. Working with artists, musicians, and performers, we examined everything from ChatGPT and machine learning to epistemic autonomy and AI-mediated knowledge.

It was fascinating to see how artists approach AI differently than technologists. While tech discussions often focus on capabilities and limitations, these creators brought fresh perspectives on AI as a form of cultural technology and knowledge mediator. We explored metaphors - from "stochastic parrots" to "autocomplete on steroids" - each revealing different aspects of how AI shapes our understanding and creative processes.

These discussions deeply connected with my current research on epistemic autonomy and AI authorship. As we increasingly rely on large language models and AI systems for knowledge and creative work, how do we maintain independent thinking and artistic agency? The insights from The New School's creative community added valuable perspectives to these philosophical questions about knowledge, creativity, and human-AI collaboration.

"ChatGPT lied," Yuval Noah Harari declared during our recent conversation at TivoliVredenburg in Utrecht, where he presented the Dutch translation of his latest book "Nexus." His statement, while compelling, reveals a deeper philosophical confusion about the nature of deception and truth.
The accusation of "lying" presupposes consciousness, intent, and an understanding of truth - qualities that large language models fundamentally lack. These systems don't make truth claims in any meaningful sense; they generate probabilistic responses based on patterns in their training data. When a human lies, they consciously choose to deceive, knowing the difference between truth and falsehood. An AI system can produce incorrect information, but calling this a "lie" anthropomorphizes a statistical process.
During our discussion, I challenged Harari's framing. The real issue isn't that AI systems lie or tell the truth, but rather that they operate in a space entirely outside the traditional binary of truth and falsehood. They are sophisticated pattern matchers generating outputs that can appear convincing while being disconnected from any genuine understanding or truth-seeking behavior.

John Krakauer presented research on the science of happiness and depression. Using smartphone-based data collection and neuroimaging, his team explored how daily experiences shape overall well-being. We discussed links between happiness, brain activity, and dopamine levels. He also shared insights on major depression, using computational models to analyze decision-making and the mood-behavior relationship in depressed individuals. The talk highlighted the importance of happiness as a societal metric and offered new perspectives on understanding and potentially treating depression.

Teching Performing Arts Strategies for the Future for the New School's Master's in Arts Management and Entrepreneurship.

The philosophy of AI dialogue will be enriched by the contributions of invited speakers from diverse academic backgrounds, including Joanna Bryson from Hertie School, Berlin, Herman Cappellen from the University of Hong Kong, Marta Halina from Cambridge, England, and Sven Nyholm from LMU Munich.

Is ChatGPT an author? Given its capacity to generate something that reads like human-written text in response to prompts, it might seem natural to ascribe authorship to ChatGPT. However, by scrutinizing the normative aspects of authorship, we argue that ChatGPT is not an author. ChatGPT fails to meet the criteria of authorship because it lacks the ability to perform illocutionary speech acts such as promising or asserting, lacks the fitting mental states like knowledge, belief, or intention, and only with many qualifications can provide testimony. Three perspectives are compared: liberalism (which ascribes authorship to ChatGPT), conservatism (which denies ChatGPT's authorship for normative and metaphysical reasons), and moderatism (which treats ChatGPT as if it possesses authorship without committing to the existence of mental states like knowledge, belief, or intention). We conclude that conservatism provides a more nuanced understanding of authorship in AI than liberalism and moderatism, without denying the significant potential, influence, or utility of AI technologies such as ChatGPT.

The international workshop with philosophers, sociologist and lawyers from all around the world, encompassed phenomena like extremism, conspiracy theorizing, and terrorism.

In the first part of the workshop we discussed the weighty question of responsibility. We deliberated on who should be held accountable for extreme beliefs and behaviors. Should it be the individual, the community, or should we look to broader structural elements of society?

The second part expanded on the types of responsibility associated with extreme beliefs. We explored the intertwining threads of legal, moral, and epistemic responsibility. The dynamics of these responsibilities, their intersections, overlaps, and the occasional friction between them provided for a thought-provoking discourse.

The third part focused on the appropriateness of responsibility attributions. We pondered over when to assign or withhold responsibility for extreme beliefs, bearing in mind factors that might excuse or exempt an individual or group.

Virtue Epistemology is deeply connected with my topic, "Artificial Intelligence and the value of epistemic autonomy." At the conference we discussed intellectual virtues, with virtue reliabilists emphasizing natural cognitive capacities like memory and perception, and virtue responsibilists focusing on a good epistemic life or character. By understanding these different approaches to intellectual virtues, we can better navigate the challenges and opportunities presented by artificial intelligence and emerging technologies.

It was great to connect with fellow philosophers specializing in philosophy of technology and science. Together, we delved into the latest advancements in philosophy of technoscience, emphasizing modern and continental perspectives. Stimulating discussions on topics such as Artificial Intelligence, Synthetic Cells, and the Anthropocene cultivated a welcoming and intellectually invigorating atmosphere.

It was enjoyable to connect with thought leaders and experts from all over the world, discussing the societal impacts of emerging technologies. We delved into a variety of cutting-edge and transformative technologies, such as artificial intelligence, robotics, neurotechnology, synthetic biology, 3D printing, and energy transition tech, among others.