Bridging the Gap: the case for an Incompletely Theorized Agreement on AI policy

TL;DR

This paper advocates for an 'Incompletely Theorized Agreement' approach to AI policy, enabling near-term and long-term AI scholars to collaborate on shared policy projects despite differing perspectives.

Contribution

It introduces the concept of using legal 'Incompletely Theorized Agreement' to foster collaboration among AI policy researchers with divergent views.

Findings

Proposes a framework for collaboration despite theoretical disagreements

Highlights potential for practical policy cooperation

Suggests a new approach to bridging AI policy research divides

Abstract

Recent progress in artificial intelligence (AI) raises a wide array of ethical and societal concerns. Accordingly, an appropriate policy approach is needed today. While there has been a wave of scholarship in this field, the research community at times appears divided amongst those who emphasize near-term concerns, and those focusing on long-term concerns and corresponding policy measures. In this paper, we seek to map and critically examine this alleged gulf, with a view to understanding the practical space for inter-community collaboration on AI policy. This culminates in a proposal to make use of the legal notion of an incompletely theorized agreement. We propose that on certain issue areas, scholars working with near-term and long-term perspectives can converge and cooperate on selected mutually beneficial AI policy projects all the while maintaining divergent perspectives.