Understand the limits of public opinion about AI ethics
So far, our discussion has focused mostly on public opinion. But there are at least two problems with public opinion. First, relying exclusively on it can lead to the tyranny of the majority. The second problem with public opinion is that it is far from being well-informed. In the early 1920s, journalist and author Walter Lippman warned of over-reliance on public opinion when it comes to policy matters that require significant expertise. It is impossible for a lay person to be fully informed about all facets of every policy question. Even an expert in one field—say medicine—cannot be sufficiently informed to weigh in on policy matters in another field—say monetary policy. The role of public opinion, Lippman contends, is to check the use of sovereign force, based on assessments made digestible to them by disagreeing experts, pundits and journalists.
So, why should we care what the public thinks about AI ethics anyway? Shouldn’t such important matters be left to the professionals? After all, driverless car engineers are the ones who know what the cars are capable of. And it is the job of philosophers and policy-makers to figure out how to reconcile different ethical values.
Consider an example in which it seems sensible to ignore public opinion. In our Moral Machine experiment, most people believed driverless cars should prioritize the safety of a high-status, such as a business man or business woman, over that of a homeless person. But this may violate the basic, constitutional rights of citizens. Indeed, the world’s first ethical guidelines for autonomous vehicles, developed in Germany, stated that vehicles should never discriminate between people based on their individual characteristics, such as age or social status.
However, consider another result from the Moral Machine experiment: the strong public preference for prioritizing children. This preference also conflicts with the German ethical guidelines. But it can be argued that although discrimination based on age should be prohibited among adults, children need special consideration. Engaging public opinion allows us to discover the points of tension between the expert and the lay person, in an ongoing process of negotiation. And perhaps most importantly, it is possible that ethical guidelines exist today precisely because public opinion demanded them, because the issue became so widely discussed.
References
Lippmann, W. The phantom public. (Transaction Publishers, 1927).
Awad, E. et al. The Moral Machine experiment. Nature 563, 59–64 (2018).
Ethics Commission Automated and Connected Driving. (2017).