BODY / CORPOREALITY BETWEEN DEATH AND LIFE IN THE AGE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (ON THE ORIGINS OF THE AI ETHICS ISSUE)

Abstract

The article is devoted to the research of the ontological and ethical basis of the implementation of artificial intelligence (hereinafter – AI) through the prism of the concepts of body and corporeality. The object of the work is the theoretical and practical roots of the emergence of the issue of AI ethics, and the subject is the ethical consequences of the integration of AI into human living space, taking into account the specifics of subjectivity in biological and artificial structures. The interdisciplinary research methodology is formed at the intersection of diverse directions: neurobiology, cognitive sciences, physics, psychology of technology, computational social science, economics, business, engineering, medicine, and law. The aim of the article is to substantiate the transition from abstract discussions about consciousness to the development of applied mechanisms for responsible technology design. The paper analyzes the fundamental difference between humans and machines: drawing on the works of G. Northoff, A. Buccellato, F. Zilio, and S. Gouveia, it is demonstrated that AI lacks the unique «spatiotemporal dynamics» and neuroplasticity, which form the basis of a subjective point of view. Drawing on O. Dolska’s concept of the «embodied mind», it is argued that all rationality is constrained by biological embodiment, which is why AI demonstrates only «competence without comprehension» (D. Dennett, R. Hakli, P. Mäkelä, V. C. Müller). Special attention is paid to the question of whether humans in the era of AI receive a chance for a qualitatively new bodily life or death (evolution), or fall into the zone of existential risks. The socio-economic threats of dehumanization of labor and «deskilling» (E. Brynjolfsson, D. Li, L. Raymond, J. Manseau, A. Koss, D. Autor) are considered, as well as the risks of algorithmic control (K. Kellogg, M. Valentine, A. Christin). At the intersection of AI and neurotechnologies, challenges to privacy and free will are identified, as warned by R. Yuste, S. Goering, B. Agüera y Arcas, G. Bi, J. Carmena, A. Carter, J.  Fins, P. Friesen, J. Gallant, J. Huggins, J. Illes, P. Kellmeyer, E. Klein, A. Marblestone, C. Mitchell, E. Parens, M. Pham, A. Rubel, N. Sadato, L. Specker Sullivan, M. Teicher, D. Wasserman, A. Wexler, M. Whittaker, and J. Wolpaw. The approach of «ethics by design» (B. Friedman, P. Brey, B. Dainow) is substantiated as a key tool for minimizing these threats, which implies the integration of societal values directly into the system architecture. This is supported by data from the «Moral Machine Experiment» (E. Awad, S. Dsouza, R. Kim, J. Schulz, J. Henrich, A. Shariff, J.-F. Bonnefon, I. Rahwan). The legal aspect of regulation without recognizing the moral status of AI is presented by the views of J. Bryson, M. Diamantis, T. Grant, A. Bertolini, and D. Aiello.