AI ethics is a field rife with discussions that often seem to be dominated by legislative and regulatory concerns. While these aspects are crucial, focusing solely on them overlooks the broader and more nuanced relationship we need to develop with AI. My interest lies in this ambivalent, nuanced middle ground where our evolving understanding of AI intersects with our daily lives, requiring a shift in our relationship with technology.

A Shift in Public Perception

A few years ago, people were relatively comfortable with tech giants using their data as long as it led to useful outcomes. However, this perception has shifted dramatically. Today, there is a growing mistrust towards these companies, with many people doubting whether their data will be used responsibly. This change reflects a broader transformation in our moral and ethical stance towards technology. As we grapple with these concerns, it’s essential to foster an environment where people can form their own informed opinions about AI and its impact.

Beyond Legislation and Regulation

The discourse around AI ethics often gravitates towards legislation and regulation. While these are important, they represent only one aspect of the broader conversation we need to have. The real challenge lies in changing our collective mindset and understanding of AI. It’s not enough to draft new laws and regulations; we must also engage in a deeper, more philosophical dialogue about our relationship with technology and its role in society.

The Creation of Walled Gardens in AI Ethics

In many fields, complex terminologies and exclusive languages create barriers to broader understanding. This phenomenon is evident in the finance and legal industries, where jargon can exclude non-experts. Similarly, the blockchain and cryptocurrency markets have developed their own lexicons, often dominated by masculine phrases and terms that inadvertently discourage wider participation.

For example, the finance industry uses terms like “shorting,” “derivatives,” and “quantitative easing” that can be perplexing to those without a financial background. The legal sector is known for its Latin phrases and intricate legalese, which can make understanding the law seem inaccessible to the general public. In the world of blockchain and cryptocurrency, terms like “mining,” “forking,” and “HODL” (Hold On for Dear Life) have created a subculture that feels exclusive.

This exclusivity often results in a lack of diversity. In the case of cryptocurrencies, the masculine language and culture have led to predominantly male participation and investment, sidelining women and other groups.

Drawing Parallels with Ancient Chinese Metaphysics

Ancient Chinese metaphysics often employed complex and esoteric terminology to maintain the authority of scholars and create a sense of mystery and reverence. This practice ensured that only those initiated into these traditions could fully grasp their meanings. For instance:

1. Complexity and Symbolism: Terms like 劫神 (Jié Shén), translated as “Calamity Deity,” are laden with multiple layers of meaning. The character 劫 (Jié) itself can mean “calamity,” “catastrophe,” or “robbery,” implying a force that disrupts the natural order, while 神 (Shén) means “god” or “spirit.” The combination creates a nuanced concept that encompasses divine judgment, disaster, and cosmic balance.
2. Esoteric Knowledge: Many metaphysical terms were part of religious texts, philosophical discourses, or mystical traditions like Daoism and Buddhism. These texts were often written in classical Chinese, which required advanced literacy and education to understand. This exclusivity ensured that only those initiated into these traditions could fully grasp their meanings.
3. Ritual and Authority: The use of complex and obscure terms reinforced the authority of religious and philosophical leaders. By maintaining a specialised language, they positioned themselves as essential intermediaries between the common people and the divine or cosmic truths.
4. Mystery and Reverence: The complexity of these terms also served to evoke a sense of mystery and reverence. The abstract and profound nature of words like 劫神 (Jié Shén) created an aura of sacredness around the concepts they described, encouraging respect and contemplation rather than casual understanding.
5. Cultural and Philosophical Context: The terms were often rooted in the broader cultural and philosophical context of ancient China. For example, the concept of 劫 (Jié) in Buddhism refers to a kalpa, an immense period of time during which the universe undergoes cycles of creation and destruction. Understanding such a term requires familiarity with Buddhist cosmology, which was not common knowledge.

Navigating the Complex Landscape of AI Ethics

To navigate this complex landscape, we must change our relationship with AI and broaden our understanding of its implications. It’s not just about avoiding harm or complying with laws; it’s about envisioning how AI can positively shape our future. This involves fostering a dialogue that includes a diverse range of voices and perspectives, beyond just legal experts and policymakers.

Instead of focusing solely on legislative measures, we should engage in deeper, more philosophical discussions about our relationship with technology. This means encouraging participation from various sectors of society, including marginalised groups, to ensure that the development and deployment of AI are equitable and inclusive.

The Importance of Inclusive Dialogue

Creating a more inclusive dialogue around AI ethics is essential. We need to move away from exclusive, jargon-heavy conversations that alienate non-experts. By making AI ethics more accessible and engaging, we can empower more people to participate in shaping the future of technology. This involves simplifying complex concepts, using clear and relatable language, and actively seeking input from diverse communities.

Key Questions that Need Addressing

• How can we ensure that AI development is inclusive and considers the perspectives of marginalised groups?
• What steps can we take to prevent the creation of walled gardens in AI ethics that exclude non-experts?
• How can we foster a more inclusive and engaging dialogue around AI ethics?
• What role can different sectors of society play in shaping the future of AI?
• How can we balance the need for regulation with the importance of philosophical and ethical discussions?

By addressing these questions, we can work towards a more equitable and inclusive approach to AI ethics, one that empowers everyone to participate in the conversation and contribute to the responsible development and deployment of AI technologies.