{"id":2441,"date":"2019-03-09T20:08:28","date_gmt":"2019-03-09T20:08:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/?p=2441"},"modified":"2021-03-15T11:51:24","modified_gmt":"2021-03-15T11:51:24","slug":"a-i-explainability-versus-the-heart","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/artifical-intelligence\/a-i-explainability-versus-the-heart","title":{"rendered":"A.I. Explainability versus \u2018the Heart\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"

Researchers are moving towards bringing \u2018heart\u2019 into A.I. Thus, new ethical questions are popping up. One of them concerns explainability.<\/h3>\n

The heart cannot explain itself.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\u201cOn ne voit bien qu’avec le c\u0153ur. L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.\u201d [Antoine de Saint-Exup\u00e9ry]<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u2018Invisible to the eye\u2019 means \u2018inexplainable in clear logic.\u2019 What the heart sees, it can only transmit in poetical terms \u2013 which can only be understood by another heart.<\/p>\n

This<\/strong> is becoming a problem in A.I.<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

inasmuch as one is going toward deep pattern recognition. [see: \u201cA.I. Is in the Patterns<\/a>\u201d] The deeper one goes, the more related to \u2018the heart.\u2019 Thus: \u2018invisible to the eye.\u2019 Necessarily, one loses full explainability.<\/p>\n

This is related to Deep Neural Networks (DNN), although not straightforwardly. It\u2019s not because one uses DNN technology that one approaches \u2018the heart.\u2019 But indeed, it is one of the tools that may be helpful.<\/p>\n

Less explainable, less control<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Towards the future of A.I., do we need to relinquish altogether any effort toward putting \u2018heart\u2019 into it? That would be a huge decision. I think it\u2019s impossible, given the very fuzzy borders to the concept of \u2018heart\u2019 or how to bring it to bear in A.I.<\/p>\n

Moreover, the drive towards putting heart into A.I. will be huge. It has the positive potential to make many human lives, even human life in general, much more rewarding, interesting, happy. Because of this, it will be an enormous financial boon to many parties.<\/p>\n

Shortly put, we will not be able to stop it.<\/p>\n

Instead of trying to avoid it, one can better think about ways to manage it. What is the most ethical way? What is the safest way towards us, organic mortals?<\/p>\n

Is, on the other side, super-intelligence without<\/em> heart not most dangerous of all?<\/p>\n

Trustworthiness<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Should we then completely rely on the goodwill of heartful A.I. itself, trusting that \u2018the heart\u2019 will make A.I. behave towards humans in ethical ways? Will its morality be always oriented toward human wellbeing? [see: \u201cWhat Is Morality to A.I.?<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n

That reliance is most probably too<\/u> trustful. Even if A.I. eventually may become \u2018enlightened\u2019 enough to look upon humans with way much more compassion than they do themselves, there is also a road towards that Xanadu. On that road, accidents may happen with hugely disastrous consequences.<\/p>\n

So, we should indeed defend ourselves, making explainability a necessary feature of A.I., at least at the highest level.<\/p>\n

Accountability: explainability at high level<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

as we also ask humans to be accountable even if they don\u2019t know in many cases exactly why or how they do what they do. Experts especially are notorious for not knowing how they know what they know. This has become painfully clear while trying to develop so-called expert systems a few decades ago. This stood \u2013 time and time again \u2013 in stark contrast to the experts\u2019 idea about their own \u2018very much explainable\u2019 expertise.<\/p>\n

Accountability is explainability at the level where it matters \u2014 no need for the full Monty. We can have sensible discussions about where and how it does really matter. In my view, it matters much more in the case of A.I. than of human experts.<\/p>\n

What about us, personally?<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This also heightens the relevance of some age-old questions about ourselves of the species homo sapiens sapiens and our human \u2018heart.\u2019 What IS it in the first place, if one speaks of it, of course, in a metaphorical way. Is \u2018heart\u2019 separate from \u2018mind?\u2019 Many philosophers have thought so, or at least have written that way.<\/p>\n

Others see heart and mind as intrinsically interwoven. Within AURELIS, it is even a top priority to strive towards interwovenness, as much as possible. [see: \u201cRationality and Poetry<\/a>\u201d]<\/p>\n

According to me, we can understand ourselves much better through the insight that rationality and poetry \u2013 \u2018the heart\u2019 \u2013 are necessary to each other.<\/p>\n

That makes us more<\/em> accountable.<\/p>\n

So should also be the case of A.I.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/a>
<\/a>

Please login to bookmark<\/h3>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t<\/form><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Researchers are moving towards bringing \u2018heart\u2019 into A.I. Thus, new ethical questions are popping up. One of them concerns explainability. The heart cannot explain itself. \u201cOn ne voit bien qu’avec le c\u0153ur. L’essentiel est invisible pour les yeux.\u201d [Antoine de Saint-Exup\u00e9ry] \u201cIt is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential Read the full article…<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/a>
<\/a>

Please login to bookmark<\/h3>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t<\/form><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":2442,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","jetpack_publicize_message":""},"categories":[28],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i2.wp.com\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/356.jpg?fit=960%2C564&ssl=1","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9Fdiq-Dn","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2441"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2441"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2441\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4779,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2441\/revisions\/4779"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2442"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/aurelis.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}