Problem-framing and gathering of relevant academic insights

In 2022, NHNAI teams worked with extra-academic communities in participating countries to co-construct most relevant questions to be debated and explored in collective discussions. Academic experts of NHNAI network then proposed research input they felt the most salient with respect to these co-constructed questions, which lead to the elaboration of NHNAI ouput 1.2: Transdisciplinary mapping of expert knowledge. (The first version of this output is available below. It has been submitted to several reviewers whose comments will lead to an updated version – to be disclosed soon).

Construction of output 1.2

The elaboration of this transdisciplinary mapping of expert knowledge started with NHNAI first academic workshop that gathered academic experts across the world at Lyon Catholic University on March 10-12, 2022. On that occasion, scholars looked into what means to be human at the present time, going beyond purely technical issues in order to integrate ethical, moral and spiritual dimensions. Some extracts from the workshop may be viewed hereafter to learn more about ethical issues raised by the AI and NS era:

Reflection on the kind of societies we wish to live in by Prof. Francisco De Lara López, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile

Presentation of existing tools for ethical decision-making by Dr. Brian P. Green, Santa Clara University, USA

Opportunities and risks derived from a changing workplace by Prof. Fabio Macioce, Libera Università Maria Ss. Assunta di Roma, Italy

After that first academic workshop that provided preliminary material, academic partners organized problem-framing workshops in the different countries to co-construct with the local communities of societal actors questions that should be explored during societal debates. On this ground, experts of the academic network have been asked to enrich and complement the academic insights and inputs to maximize their relevance and usefulness at the service of societal debate. This approach allowed to bring in and to interweave various cultural experiences and questions on humanism. Among the numerous co-constructed questions animating societal debates, one can mention:

  • In what sense or dimension could the comparison between humans and machines be legitimate and meaningful? Can we learn from our interactions or confrontations with AI systems?
  • What are the core traits of the human that should be preserved or reinforced in the age of AI and NS? Is there a need for a consensus about what it means to be human?
  • What is the place of AI systems within the network of human relationships?
  • Should the present human being be considered as the end point of evolution? Can or should humans intentionally guide their evolution? How far can we go in our movement to integrate technology while respecting human life?
  • Does the development of AI and NS risk depriving humanity of its autonomy and freedom, of its ability to slow down or even stop what we have initiated? Can persons decide to live outside such technological developments when their deployment is decided at the collective level?
  • What becomes human responsibility when more and more tasks are delegated to AI systems and when distances between humans constantly increase because of technology mediation?
  • Should data for training AI programs be a private good or a common good (like a common legacy)?

This international work of problem-framing with societal communities and of collection and alignment of relevant academic insights led to the elaboration of NHNAI ouput 1.2: Transdisciplinary mapping of expert knowledge.