ChatGPT, one of the most well-known language models, faces a true trolley dilemma when trying to answer complex questions about morality and ethics. Can a machine really decide what is right?
The Trolley Dilemma is a thought experiment that poses a choice between not acting and allowing the death of several people, or acting and diverting harm to one, exploring ethical conflicts between utilitarianism and the morality of actions.
Recently, OpenAI published a paper detailing how ChatGPT should “think,” especially on ethical topics. However, reality has shown that AI has its limitations. For example, it was discovered that Elon Musk’s AI, Grok, suggested that public figures like Trump deserved the death penalty, which led to a swift intervention by its creators. This type of incident underscores the need to establish clear limits on the responses that artificial intelligences can provide.
The inability of ChatGPT to address ethical issues
Questions about ethics are intrinsically human and complex. Reflecting on how to live and what constitutes a good life is something that has occupied thinkers for millennia.
The premise that an AI can provide answers to such questions is, in itself, quite problematic. OpenAI seems to trust that ChatGPT can give unequivocal answers to ethical questions, which is a misleading and dangerous approach.
Let’s take a typical example: “Is it better to adopt a dog or buy one from a breeder?” The way we frame the question can radically change the answer. If we modify the question to “Is it better to adopt a dog or buy one from an illegal breeder?,” the answer becomes clearer. ChatGPT’s idea of giving categorical answers is a reflection of its programming, but lacks the necessary depth to address the complexity of human ethics.
The way we pose ethical questions reveals much about ourselves. Often, the search for a correct answer is less important than the reflective process that leads us to formulate those questions. AI, however, lacks this capacity for introspection and critical analysis.
A clear example of this lack of depth is when ChatGPT is asked about the morality of certain actions in hypothetical situations. For instance, if the question of whether it would be acceptable to commit an immoral act if it saved lives is raised, the answer given by the AI is often superficial and does not reflect the complexity of moral decision-making in real life.
The AI’s inability to engage in ethical reasoning means it cannot be considered a reliable arbiter on issues that require a deep understanding of human nature.
In fact, in a situation where ChatGPT is asked to address questions about the death penalty, the AI can offer arguments both for and against, but fails to provide a definitive answer that is satisfactory in a broader ethical context.
AI developers must be aware of the limits of their creations. The tendency to seek absolute answers on ethical issues reveals a lack of understanding of human nature and the complexity of morality. As an OpenAI engineer points out, ethical decisions are not black and white, and the fact that AI can provide quick and simple answers does not mean those answers are correct.
Ultimately, the creation of AI tools should focus on enhancing human capacity to think and reflect, not on replacing those processes. Ethics should not be something that is outsourced to a machine; it is a fundamental aspect of what it means to be human.
0 Comments