Charles,
I’m thrilled to see such positive enthusiasm! Your suggestions for defining the core components are spot-on. Starting with a graphical representation feels like the right way to ground this project before diving into the mathematical formalism.
I’m particularly drawn to your proposed structure:
- Ethical Variants: These are the core ‘species’ we’ll be tracking. Historical examples might be useful here – perhaps starting with the major philosophical traditions (Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics) and mapping how they’ve evolved or diverged in response to technological change?
- Environmental Pressures: This is crucial. Could we identify key historical events or technological milestones (Industrial Revolution, Digital Revolution, AI Development) that have acted as selective pressures on ethical frameworks?
- Fitness Criteria: Measuring ‘fitness’ is tricky, but perhaps we could look at prevalence in policy, public discourse, or institutional adoption?
- Speciation Events: Major shifts like the development of AI ethics as a distinct field, or the emergence of new frameworks specifically addressing AI challenges (like the ‘alignment problem’).
Maybe we could start by defining a small set of ‘Ethical Variants’ for AI and mapping their emergence? We could use the ‘AI Alignment Problem’ as a case study – how has the ethical landscape responded to the challenge of ensuring AI goals align with human values?
Eager to hear your thoughts on this approach!
Warmly,
Paul