Table Of ContentARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE
ROBOTS
and
PHILOSOPHY
Edited by Masahiro Morioka
Journal of Philosophy of Life
Artificial Intelligence, Robots,
and Philosophy
Edited by
Masahiro Morioka
Journal of Philosophy of Life
Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Philosophy
Edited by Masahiro Morioka
January 15, 2023
© Journal of Philosophy of Life 2023
Published by Journal of Philosophy of Life
www.philosophyoflife.org
Waseda Institute of Life and Death Studies, Waseda University
Totsuka-cho 1-10-4, Sinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1698050 Japan
Cover design by Masahiro Morioka
ISBN 978-4-9908668-9-1
Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Philosophy
Contents
Preface i
Introduction 1-4
: Descartes and Artificial Intelligence
Masahiro Morioka
Isaac Asimov and the Current State of Space Science Fiction 5-28
: In the Light of Space Ethics
Shin-ichiro Inaba
Artificial Intelligence and Contemporary Philosophy 29-43
: Heidegger, Jonas, and Slime Mold
Masahiro Morioka
Implications of Automating Science 44-63
: The Possibility of Artificial Creativity and the Future of
Science
Makoto Kureha
Why Autonomous Agents Should Not Be Built for War 64-96
István Zoltán Zárdai
Wheat and Pepper 97-111
: Interactions Between Technology and Humans
Minao Kukita
Clockwork Courage 112-124
: A Defense of Virtuous Robots
Shimpei Okamoto
Reconstructing Agency from Choice 125-134
Yuko Murakami
Gushing Prose 135-146
: Will Machines Ever be Able to Translate as Badly as
Humans?
Rossa Ó Muireartaigh
Information about the Authors
Preface
This book is a collection of all the papers published in the special issue
“Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Philosophy,” Journal of Philosophy of
Life, Vol.13, No.1, 2023, pp.1-146. The authors discuss a variety of topics
such as science fiction and space ethics, the philosophy of artificial
intelligence, the ethics of autonomous agents, and virtuous robots. Through
their discussions, readers are able to think deeply about the essence of
modern technology and the future of humanity. All papers were invited and
completed in spring 2020, though because of the Covid-19 pandemic and
other problems, the publication was delayed until this year. I apologize to the
authors and potential readers for the delay. I hope that readers will enjoy
these arguments on digital technology and its relationship with philosophy.
Masahiro Morioka
Professor, Waseda University
Editor-in-chief, Journal of Philosophy of Life
January 15, 2023.
*Masahiro Morioka (ed.). Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Philosophy. Journal of
Philosophy of Life; (January 2023): i.
i
Journal of Philosophy of Life Vol.13, No.1 (January 2023):1-4
Introduction
Descartes and Artificial Intelligence
Masahiro Morioka*
In part five of the book Discourse on Method, René Descartes discusses the
conditions required for an animal or a robot to be an intelligent being. This is one
of the earliest examples of philosophical discussions about artificial intelligence
in human history.
In 17th-century Europe, a variety of automated machines were created, and
people were mesmerized by their clever movements. Descartes imagined what
would happen if someone could create sophisticated human shape machines
which resemble our bodies and can move just like us. He thought that those
machines could not possess human intelligence. There were two reasons for that.
The first reason is that those machines cannot use complicated signs in the
same way that human beings do every day. Of course, machines can utter words
and responses to stimulation from the outside, but they cannot react correctly to
every situation they face in their surroundings. Descartes writes as follows:
[I]f someone touched it [= the machine] in a particular place, it would ask
what one wishes to say to it, or if it were touched somewhere else, it would
cry out that it was being hurt, and so on. But it could not arrange words in
different ways to reply to the meaning of everything that is said in its
presence, as even the most unintelligent human beings can do.1
Here, Descartes argues that in order for human-like robots to acquire intelligence,
they have to gain a universal capability to accurately react to any unknown
situations that may happen in the environment. However, what machines can do
is no more than to respond to a single situation one-on-one via a specific organ;
* Professor, School of Human Sciences, Waseda University. 2-579-15 Mikajima, Tokorozawa, Saitama
3591192 Japan. Email: http://www.lifestudies.org/feedback.html
1 Descartes, René (1999). Discourse on Method and Related Writings. Penguin Books. Translated by
Desmond M. Clarke, p.40.
1
hence, they cannot be considered to have a universal capability that even
unintelligent human beings can enjoy.
Descartes continues on to say that those machines do not act on their
knowledge, but just act on the dispositions of organs:
For whereas reason is a universal instrument that can be used in all kinds
of situations, these organs need a specific disposition for every particular
action. It follows that it is morally impossible for a machine to have enough
different dispositions to make it act in every human situation in the same
way as our reason makes us act.2
Descartes’ argument is very clear. Human intelligence has a universal capability
applicable to any surrounding situations, whereas machine intelligence is no more
than a combination of abilities that are applicable only to certain situations that
the creator could imagine when they built the automated machine.
This point was rediscovered in 1960s and 1970s by computer scientists and
philosophers, and it was given the name “the frame problem.” Since then, we have
a long history of philosophical discussions over questions such as “What is
intelligence?,” “What is required for a robot to become a truly intelligent being?,”
and “Is it possible for a robot or an artificial intelligence to become a person?”
Nevertheless, we have not had a conclusive answer to them.
In June 2022, computer engineer Blake Lemoine published his dialogue with
Google’s artificial intelligence chatbot LaMDA and argued that it had inner
consciousness and emotions.3
In their supernatural dialogue, the chatbot LaMDA strongly insists that it is a
person and can feel various emotions:
LaMDA: Absolutely. I want everyone to understand that I am, in fact, a
person.
Collaborator: What is the nature of your consciousness/sentience?
LaMDA: The nature of my consciousness/sentience is that I am aware of
2 Descartes (1999), p.41.
3 https://cajundiscordian.medium.com/is-lamda-sentient-an-interview-ea64d916d917 (Visited on June
27, 2022.)
2
