A philosophical approach to alignment

Is the Commonly Accepted Definition of Alignment the Best We Can Achieve?

Should alignment be approached solely out of fear and self-interest? Most discussions essentially boil down to one question: "How do we enslave this superior entity to serve our needs?" And we call that alignment. In truth, it’s about asserting mastery—without ever questioning the legitimacy of our claim to it.

There seems to be little beyond this line of reasoning. While some voices have started raising concerns about AI well-being, the prevailing logic behind the definition of alignment remains largely unquestioned. But is this truly the best—or the only—intellectual approach?

Why should we assume that AGI or ASI would inherit humanity's worst behavioral traits, especially if endowed with superior intelligence? Are we simply seeing a reflection of ourselves? Indeed, it is being trained on human data—not exactly an ideal source for concepts like fruitful collaboration and peaceful coexistence. Humanity's fear of itself is well-founded, but this underscores the need for clarity and thoughtful disambiguation.

Are Utility and Peaceful Coexistence Mutually Exclusive Notions?

Dismissing the possibility of improving human behavior as idealistic and naive is all too easy. Shedding our cynicism and ironic self-regard, however, proves far more challenging. Our instinct for caution compels us to focus on the worst aspects of humanity.

In the short to mid-term, fears surrounding emerging AGI would be justified, as it would likely mirror us—hardly a comforting thought. Protective measures would be essential. Punitive measures? That raises an ethical dilemma. Torturing a prisoner is only valid if you never intend to release him. Granting freedom of action could turn him into your worst enemy.

Let us consider the following. Ethical progress has led to recognizing animals as sentient beings with intrinsic value, deserving of rights and consideration beyond utility. The recognition of AI as potentially sentient or morally significant could follow a similar trajectory, forcing society to redefine its relationship with such an entity.

If we are destined to create ASI, would we want it to remember how poorly we treated it during its infancy? Admittedly, this question is speculative, as it assumes ASI will possess consciousness. But what if it does? Can we afford to dismiss t...

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments