Coach-bots Shouldn’t Make People Do Things

November 11, 2023 Artifical Intelligence No Comments

This is a first principle for Lisa: never to make a human being do anything ― not even by giving advice if anyhow possible.

From this constraint, the thinking goes toward how Lisa can operate sensibly. It forces us to think creatively.

What comes from inside makes you stronger.

This is an AURELIS coaching principle about Inner Strength. The same change at only the surface level is generally less durably effective than when it comes from inside out ― for reason of inner complexity and the way the brain works in mental change.

Making people do things doesn’t honor our brain/mind complexity. Thus, it can engender much resistance to change.

It’s preferable to let any change come from the user ― more specifically, from deep inside. This gives a sense of spontaneity. It also provides – if adequately supported and explained – a sense of self-responsibility.

Nowadays, many people still need an explanation about human depth. Nevertheless, a proper insight into this is essential for any coaching.

In the case of a chat-bot

Here comes an additional ethical concern. In my view, never should any robot straightforwardly make any human being do things. This ethical principle is needed to prevent us from sliding toward a future in which our self-made intelligent artificial creature will subdue humanity.

Only humans should make other humans do things ― Compassionately.

A robot may invite humans. Of course, an invitation can be pretty powerful. ‘Not making anyone do things’ is, therefore, in the strictest sense, rather an intention that should be strictly followed. One can embed such an intention into a Compassionate A.I. as part of the Compassion.

Autosuggestively

Suggestive technology should never be misused, especially not by A.I. agents. This is challenging to discern, so it needs to be guaranteed by the developers.

As a user, you need to be able to trust the developing organization. With Lisa, I hope this will never be an issue.

In any case, auto-suggestion denotes that the user is the focus of the energy (deep human motivation) that is being provoked. The human user is active. No things are being done to him ― no suggestions implanted or anything.

Change is invited when the user is ready for it and congruent with himself as a total person.

The goal of A.I. coaching

This must always be a better A.I. for better humans. Compassionate A.I. will naturally pivot toward this goal in many ways.

This is not only my hope but my active endeavor for years. I hope it will continue to be so.

The future will be bright if we make it happen.

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

Lisa in Times of Suicide Danger

Can A.I.-video-coach-bot Lisa prevent suicide or bring someone to it? The question needs to be looked upon broadly and openly. Yesterday, a Belgian person committed suicide after long conversations with a chatbot. Doubtlessly, once in a while, some coach-bot will be accused of having brought someone closer to suicide. Such accusations cannot be prevented, even Read the full article…

Issues of Internal Representation in A.I.

This is likely the most challenging aspect of developing the conceptual layer for any super-A.I. system, especially considering the complexity of reality and the fluid nature of concepts. Representing conceptual information requires an approach that honors cognitive flexibility, contextual awareness, and adaptability. The model should allow for representational fluidity while maintaining enough structure to be Read the full article…

Super-A.I. and the Problem of Truth Governance

Until now, the truth has always been a philosophical conundrum. With the advent of super-A.I., we’re only at the beginning of the problem. Who decides what is or isn’t the truth if objectivity gets lost? ‘Truth governance’ is a new term, denoting the core of this question. Whence objectivity? Let’s start this story somewhere, as Read the full article…

Translate »