Can Machines Philosophize?
Michele Pizzochero, Giorgia Dellaferrera

TL;DR
This paper introduces a new framework inspired by the Turing test to evaluate how well machines can mirror human philosophical views, demonstrated through a survey on scientific realism involving AI-generated machine personas and human respondents.
Contribution
The paper presents a novel methodological framework for assessing machine philosophical views by impersonation and statistical analysis, applied to scientific realism.
Findings
Machines' philosophical views are similar to humans' on average.
Machines show weaker scientific realism than humans.
Machines exhibit more coherence in their philosophical positions.
Abstract
Inspired by the Turing test, we present a novel methodological framework to assess the extent to which a population of machines mirrors the philosophical views of a population of humans. The framework consists of three steps: (i) instructing machines to impersonate each human in the population, reflecting their backgrounds and beliefs, (ii) administering a questionnaire covering various philosophical positions to both humans and machines, and (iii) statistically analyzing the resulting responses. We apply this methodology to the debate on scientific realism, a long-standing philosophical inquiry exploring the relationship between science and reality. By considering the outcome of a survey of over 500 human participants, including both physicists and philosophers of science, we generate their machine personas using an artificial intelligence engine based on a large language model. We…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsEthics and Social Impacts of AI · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations · Social Robot Interaction and HRI
