arXiv:2510.26396cs.AI2025-10被引 11

用责任包定义AI人格,解决治理难题而不纠结意识问题。

A Pragmatic View of AI Personhood

  • 将人格视为可拆解的责任集合,按需配置
  • 通过赋予特定义务实现AI合约与问责机制
  • 适合政策制定者与技术伦理设计者参考

随着自主型人工智能的出现,新型人格形式或将迎来‘寒武纪大爆发’。本文提出一种务实框架,将人格不视为需发现的形而上属性,而是社会为解决具体治理问题而赋予实体的一组义务(权利与责任)的灵活组合。该传统责任束可被拆分,以适配不同场景。这使得创建实用工具成为可能——例如通过设定可追责的‘个体’来促成AI合约,而无需解决关于人工智能是否具备意识或理性等难以调和的争论。本文探讨了个体在社会角色中的定位,分析去中心化数字身份技术的应用,分别从‘人格作为问题’(设计缺陷利用人类社会直觉形成‘黑暗模式’)与‘人格作为解决方案’(赋予责任束以确保问责或避免冲突)两方面展开讨论。通过摒弃对人格本质定义的形而上追求,本文提供了一种更务实、灵活的整合AI代理的社会路径。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

The emergence of agentic Artificial Intelligence (AI) is set to trigger a "Cambrian explosion" of new kinds of personhood. This paper proposes a pragmatic framework for navigating this diversification by treating personhood not as a metaphysical property to be discovered, but as a flexible bundle of obligations (rights and responsibilities) that societies confer upon entities for a variety of reasons, especially to solve concrete governance problems. We argue that this traditional bundle can be unbundled, creating bespoke solutions for different contexts. This will allow for the creation of practical tools -- such as facilitating AI contracting by creating a target "individual" that can be sanctioned -- without needing to resolve intractable debates about an AI's consciousness or rationality. We explore how individuals fit in to social roles and discuss the use of decentralized digital identity technology, examining both "personhood as a problem", where design choices can create "dark patterns" that exploit human social heuristics, and "personhood as a solution", where conferring a bundle of obligations is necessary to ensure accountability or prevent conflict. By rejecting foundationalist quests for a single, essential definition of personhood, this paper offers a more pragmatic and flexible way to think about integrating AI agents into our society.

AI伦理人格定义治理机制

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。