The ethics of AI from a Buddhist Perspective w/Soraj Hongladarom

Show notes

In this season premiere, Élaina interviews Professor Soraj Hongladarom, author of The Ethics of AI and Robotics: A Buddhist Viewpoint. They discuss finding a way through traditional history of philosophy to interdisciplinary philosophical work.

You can find Soraj on Twitter @sonamsangbo

Rate and review the podcast wherever you listen!

Find Philosophy Casting Call on Twitter and Instagram @philoccpod

Find the transcripts at https://www.elainagauthiermamaril.com/philosophy-casting-call-podcast

You can support the podcast on Ko-Fi.com/philoccpod

Philosophy Casting Call is hosted, edited, and produced by Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril

Follow Élaina on Instagram @spinoodler and Twitter @ElainaGMamaril

Transcript

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 0:04

This is Philosophy Casting Call.

Hello, and welcome to Season Two of Philosophy Casting Call, a podcast that features underrepresented philosophers. My name is Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril and I'm your host and resident casting director. Since the end of season one, many things have changed. We've evolved in this pandemic, I caught COVID; I'm currently recovering. I also graduated. So I officially have a PhD, you may call me Doctor, if you so wish. And I had interviews with wonderful, wonderful people.

I'm very excited to present this second season of philosophy casting call, and I want to take you around the world. I made a conscious decision to gather a cast from different parts of the globe. And it provided with some interesting themes, including but not limited to, kind of agreements with universities to return to the home country to teach after going to the global north to study. And as usual, it becomes very clear that people decide to take certain research routes because of material things like whatever funding was available at that time, or what programmes are being promoted. So there are some common things that are coming back from season one in that sense, because they remain true into how academia shapes who we are as scholars. In this first episode, I present to you my interview with Soraj Hongladarom, a professor of philosophy in Thailand, and we discuss everything from how he first discovered philosophy, his circuitous route, and how he ended up focusing on the ethics of AI from a Buddhist perspective. You will notice that there is some sneaky Spinoza discussion snuck in, I could not help myself. This is after all, my podcast, so I'll discuss Spinoza if I want to, but you might see that Spinoza pops back up at some point during the season. I did not plan for this to happen, but what can I say he's just a popular guy. So without further ado, please enjoy my interview with Soraj Hongladarom.

Hello, Soraj, thank you so much for joining me.

Soraj Hongladarom 2:57

Oh, you're welcome. It's a pleasure to talk with you.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 3:01

Would you like to introduce yourself for the listeners?

Soraj Hongladarom 3:04

Yes, I'm teaching philosophy at the Department of Philosophy at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, Thailand. And I'm also the director of the Centre for Science, Technology and Society at the University. The Centre is a place where people, scholars who are interested in the intersections of science, technology and society to to meet and work together.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 3:31

Yes, I when I found out about your research, at first, I find out about the work you do about ethics and AI and robotics. But before we can get into that, I wanted to ask, how did you discover philosophy as something that you wanted to study? And do?

Soraj Hongladarom 3:47

Oh, yes. You know, I'm approaching the end of my career. Because in Thailand, in Thai universities, we have a mandatory retirement age at 60. And I'm 59. So I'm thinking about what to do next. In the case that I cannot find any, any job after my retirement. But for the past, the question you asked about is a interesting story. I did not start out studying philosophy. At first, my major subject at the university was English language and literature. And I didn't have an idea of becoming a professor in philosophy. When I was in college. In fact, I did not think much about you know, what, what kind of occupation I would have. When I was in college. I was interested in English literature, American literature quite a lot. So that's what I was in Interested in. And after I finished my bachelor's degree programme, I went on to study in the US in the English department for about a year, two semesters. And then my father called me and asked me if I was interested in changing my subject, because there was a scholarship available in philosophy. And he would like to know, if I was interested in you know, switching, just like that, switching from English to philosophy in order to get the scholarship, because at that time, my parents were supporting me, with my studies in the US, I said, okay, because I did not want to be, you know, a burden to my parents, though, I applied for the scholarship, it was a programme for students to study a subject that the university feels that they lacked personnel in that area. So that was a contract that after I finish, I had to come back and work at the same university, this university, you know, for a number of years in return. So I did and I notified my university Indiana University in the US that I would like to switch to change the major subject, I was in the master's programme at that time. And they said, okay, and in Thailand, it was very difficult to do that. I don't know about the UK. But in the US, it's quite a normal process, because there are credit hours, and you have to accumulate the required number of credit hours, and so on. However, I did have quite a bit of connection with philosophy, together with English, of course, I minored in philosophy. And I remember the time when I was in high school, I went to the new school library, and they found a book in Thai language on philosophy. And I remember that a light the book very much, and and the book kind of sparked my interest in the subject. Only that I was interested in English more at that time. So So it's quite a, you know, convoluted, kind of pass, leading.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 7:44

But that's, that's very interesting, because you see a combination of interests and then circumstance, you know, if this scholarship had not come up, maybe yes, right. Not have gone there, right. And then it's interesting for me to hear that. It was like a study to work scenario, when now it's kind of the opposite. There are no jobs after you've finished studying, and they're like, you have to work for us. So that's, that's very, very interesting. And can I ask, when you read that book, in the Thai language? What was it that I don't know if you remember the book, but maybe quite an aspect of philosophy? Because philosophy, as you know, it's a wide subject?

Soraj Hongladarom 8:26

Yes, of course, it is. It's a book about the whole of history of philosophy. And the author was a tie scholar, who was the first person who went to the west and studied philosophy officially formally. He did not get a degree in philosophy. He, his main area of subject was geology. He was a scientist, but he was very interested in philosophy. And he wrote this big philosophy book, and he talked about everything from the pre Socratics to the moderns. In the West, you know, and he connected what he wrote about with his perspective, coming from Thailand, and, you know, having been embedded in Thai culture. So he put his own kind of individual and critical perspective into what he wrote in the book. But But basically, the book was intended as an introduction to Western philosophy. Kind of Bertrand Russell's big book on history of philosophy, you know, you can imagine that kind of work. Right now. I'm also doing another research work on the reception of the history of Western philosophy in Thailand, and this book and this author, his name was some featured very prominently in the story that Michael Can I are doing right now?

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 10:02

Oh, that's wonderful. Well, of course, if you let me know, I can link it so people can check it. Yeah. Again, I find this really interesting that your introduction, although you were studying in the US was through a Thai perspective on Western philosophy. And then now you are you wrote recently about a Buddhist perspective on ethics and AI and robotics, it has that always been a focus for you, or have you come to that later in your career?

Unknown Speaker 10:38

Quite later in my career, because when I was at Indiana University, they they were a the kind of department the kind of philosophy department that did not have any interests in Eastern thought at all. I mean, they, they thought that Eastern philosophy belong to another department. And at that time, Chinese philosophy or Indian philosophy were kind of the provinces of departments of comparative literature or Eastern Studies or religious studies, they were only interested in Western philosophy and only in analytic philosophy. Yes. You know, as in most philosophy, philosophy departments, I think the US...

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 11:33

In the English language in general...

Soraj Hongladarom 11:34

...the English language world, yes, yes. So that was what I studied. And I ended up writing my PhD dissertation on Immanuel Kant's. Like, his Critique of Pure Reason, the role of the imagination, in the Critique of Pure Reason, it's not, you know, a big mystery, the whole project is how to connect what you perceive through the senses, with the conceptual understanding. And, and he relied on this concept, which he called the imagination. So that was my topic for the PhD dissertation. And then when I came back to Bangkok, the first thing I noticed was that library, you know, was was more limited, and it was not it was possible, but it took much more troubles, to get recent publications, the kind of thing that you would need in order to keep up with the scholarship, in order to contribute to through the current research on hands, epistemology, I also found myself and you know, serendipity again, I found myself talking with people from other fields, like medical doctors, you know, professors of medicine, and others, and especially the ones in medicine, the medical professors, they were interested in what I'm doing, because they were looking for people who had been trained in ethics, and that kind of thing, though, we ended up working together. And I found myself gradually working more and more in applied fields, in philosophy. And then there was a call for paper back in 1998, written by my colleague, Charles S there, he's now retired and he, he used to work in at the University of Oslo for for a number of years on computer mediated communication, and culture. And at that time, during the late 1990s, the internet was just coming up. And scholars were interested in the roles that the internet was playing or what kind of influence the internet could cause. So I started thinking about what what the internet and how people communicated via the internet, in Thai language or in English language, but among Thai people, I thought about how Thai culture was shaped by this kind of communication. It was not a strictly speaking, it was not a philosophical question. It was more a sociological question. But I and Charles S is a philosopher just like me, so I, you know, Sally, and I ended up collaborating with each other for more than two decades, so I thought about this problem. And I think my contribution from philosophy was to look at this problem from the perspective of value theory, from ethics, from the basic questions of universalism versus particular resume. The question was whether there was a, so universal standard of value, that everybody in the world should subscribe to our, our weather, you know, each culture had its own particular system of values, which were not very compatible. So I wrote about this, and it became my research area for quite some time until right now. And the work that I have been doing recently, the ethics of AI kind of emerged from from this general trend on the effects of the internet and culture.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 16:11

So you've been following it since the inception, basically, since the beginning of the internet as a cultural phenomenon.

Soraj Hongladarom 16:17

Actually, it's how people communicate on the Internet, whether it's different or similar to when people really communicate in the real world. That was the question that in the late 90s, people were interested in. And there was thinking at that time, I think it's based on some ideas of some political scientists, I don't remember, I don't know whether it's similar Huntington, who had an idea of a clash of civilizations, and the clash of cultures. And the idea was that there was no really universal values or such values as universal, could be achieved only through, you know, non normative means. Because, you know, political scientists, they they look at the role of power and politics, that kind of thing. So there was the problem of globalisation. And the question was whether the internet was the agent of globalisation, and there was a belief in many people really believe, at that time that the internet could actually bring about democracy because, you know, democracy is kind of a value system. So there was this belief that the internet could bring about democratic values and democratic systems and, and it could change how a country is government, a country, which has not been democratic before. It's a very, you know, flowery, active optimism, and 20 years on experience have shown us has shown us that it is much more complicated than that.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 18:19

Yeah, I think it's part the, the reliance on like, well, if people have access to information, then everything else will change. And it's not, it's not so straightforward, but it seems like it's still a very rich area for epistemology and ethics. So even though the original call for papers wasn't philosophical, if you can see how you can treat this question and idea philosophically.

Soraj Hongladarom 18:43

Yes, yes. It was more like an interdisciplinary kind of conference.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 18:50

And is this how you got interested in Spinoza? Looking at the challenges of normativity and ethics?

Soraj Hongladarom 18:57

Yes, it dated back to my graduate school years. I took a course in early modern philosophy, and it was a year long course consisting of one in each semester, both the fall and winter semesters. And we studied intensively three philosophers Descartes, Spinoza, and Leibniz. Somehow the works of Spinoza rang a bell to me because unlike either Descartes and Leibniz, Spinoza had an idea which, to me at least, resonated with Eastern philosophy, for example, he he has a vision of everything being, you know, completely one, which in some Hindu philosophies, they also talk about everything being one. There's only one substance there's nothing outside of substance. And this substance consists of both consists of an infant Unit number of attributes is a kind of, you know, almost literary kind of vision, where, where it's an interesting story, since you as I've thought at first of writing my PhD dissertation on Spinoza. But after that course, I took another course on Kant. And at that time, I started to think that Kant was more. I don't know whether we can talk about things being more true with English, but maybe more accurate or closer to the truth of whatever. But I believed at that time, I don't do so now. But the time you know, my younger self...

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 20:39

You are forgiven. (laughs)

Soraj Hongladarom 20:43

...believed that Kant was closer to the truth, because his argument was more quoting whatever, more more rigorous, whatever. But anyway, it was always history of philosophy. Yes, it was not a popular subject among my fellow students, because they were interested in like contemporary problems in philosophy of language, or epistemology. But I found that to be a bit dry.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 21:10

Yeah, I can relate. So that's one reason why I was really drawn to your book, because when you think of AI, and robotics, and philosophy, it's a big topic right now. And there are a lot of analytic philosophers. And I find it really interesting that you brought in a different perspective, in this case, a Buddhist perspective. And you spend part of the beginning of the book, helpfully, explaining certain key things in this philosophy and theology. I would like to ask you a bit about what you call machine enlightenment in the book.

Soraj Hongladarom 21:51

Yes, yes. It's a key concept in the book. The idea is that the term is intended to be metaphorical. I mean, when we talk about machines as they, right now, they are not conscious yet though. Some computer scientists and futurists believe that machines, a eyes like Nick Bostrom, for example, they believe that the machines could become conscious in the next few years, or, at most few decades from now, I talked about that in the book, but I try to make it clear that this book is not a speculation into the future, the ethics of AI in the book is meant primarily for the AI as of now, the blind algorithm that provides an engine for our social media apps and much of other things else. So the term enlightenment represents the goal of action. In Buddhist thought, when a Buddhist practices the teaching of the Buddha, the reason why a Buddhist practices, the teaching, is that they aim at arriving at this final goal. And this final goal is represented by the total cessation or complete elimination of suffering. And suffering is a bit of a technical term in Buddhism. It includes physical suffering and pain. It's a big part of that. But it's more than that, it includes also your, your feeling that things should be after than they are right now, that somehow there is further meaning in your life that is not fulfilled, you know, this kind of feeling is part of suffering in the Buddhist sense, also. And the goal of the Buddha's teaching was to lay out a map for his followers to follow in order that in the end, they could achieve their final goal, according to the map. So the final goal is, you know, his other name, of course, it's enlightenment. And I thought about applying this this schematic idea, you know, of the Buddhist practice into an ethics of AI. So when we think about what should constitute an ethics for an AI system, what is a good thing for an AI system to be doing? I think in order to answer this question, my argument is that we should look at this map, you know, starting from right now aiding with enlightenment through practice, and we should, I think we should follow this map of this guideline in order To find an answer to the question of what constitutes the content of an AI ethics. So, this idea led to the idea that the concept of the metaphor of machine enlightenment, because when you try to think of what is good for a machine or an AI to be doing the answer is provided by the idea that what is called is what contributes to your progress towards the goal is an ancient idea. And this idea is also available in the west with the with the ancient Greeks. So, I have found a number of similarities, and then there are differences, but there are similarities between the both this idea on ethics and the ancient Greeks, especially post Aristotelian ethics, Epicurus, and especially the stoics.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 25:59

Yes, I can hear a lot of similarities with Spinoza, actually, as well. Yeah, I cannot do striving and but I suppose my question is, in this book, do you perceive machines AI robots as an extension of human agency, as opposed to an entity aside, for example, like non human animals? Because the way from what I read the way you argue is that, well, we need to programme these machines so that they perform to the best of their abilities for human good. So are you treating them as an extension of human Ness?

Soraj Hongladarom 26:38

In a way? Yes. Especially considering the level of advancement of these machines, as of now at this moment? Because in the future, when machines become really conscious, and I don't even know, and I'm sure nobody really knows whether they will become conscious at all, but in the case they are, then it does not hurt to prepare for this possibility. Because when the machines like Nick Bostrom says, When the machine becomes super intelligent, they will be able to do things that we want to be able to control them. So why not? We Why don't we put in our teach them when you know, we can teach them at this moment? Why don't we teach them to be ethical, and put in the idea that being ethical, is completely inseparable from being excellent in technical areas? Because in order for machines to be super intelligent, if at all possible, the idea I'm putting forward is that they they need to be ethical, otherwise does not hold water to talk about them being super intelligent or anything if they are evil. The underlying idea, of course, is the Socratic thought that wisdom is knowledge of virtue is knowledge, Socratic hands and the stoic idea that, you know, you have to know things completely well, in order to become completely ethical. And if there is a way of teaching of programming, the AI algorithms at this moment, and when they become super intelligent, then they will understand that super intelligence comes with responsibility comes with the kind of things that we associate with being ethical and being more on top. That's the basic idea and thinking about so we have to look at machines or AI algorithms, as they exist. Right now, they are still blind. I mean, they, they don't know what they are doing.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 29:07

I have to ask this and it might be a difficult question. But how do you see this intersecting with Disability Studies? Because you keep talking about excellence and performance. And as we look to disabled futures, how do you see this emphasis on morality and kind of functionality as being viable in a world where disabled people exist?

Soraj Hongladarom 29:37

Yes, yes, very good question. Thanks a lot for asking. It's a very, very important question also, let me start out first by looking at what the Buddhists would answer. In more general term in Buddhism, is it possible for a disabled person to achieve enlightenment? Yes, of course. no obstacles are not unless the disability is a cognitive one, in that case is more of a challenge. Because there are texts in, in the Scripture in the Buddhist scriptures saying that, if you are cognitively impaired, it's does not mean that you cannot progress toward the goal, you can make some progress, but the cognitive impairment kind of hinders your level of understanding and the ability, eventually to achieve the final goal. But But that does not mean at all, that no progress can be made. And it depends also on the level of cognitive impairment we're talking about, right? Because what I'm talking about right now is people who really need a lot of help and who are so challenged, that they kind of won't be able to help themselves. So, in that extreme cases, that is a bit difficult, but but my my talk here should not must not be interpreted or be understood, as you know, oh, you know, in that case, Buddhism teaches that less intellectually gifted people, I mean, people in who in schools and you will get lower grades and one won't get achieve enlightenment not that that is not the case at all, because we are not talking about the extreme cognitive impairment in in that case, we are talking about people whose interests may diverge from the main subjects at school and, and who otherwise might be very good at what, what they are doing with the things they are interested in. So they can achieve wonders, you know, once they set their minds into something that that they love. So in that case, in this paper, would have no obstacles at all. And so that's about, you know, cognitive disability. But what about people with physical disability in Buddhism, the practice does not require any physical exertion, I mean, if you can set your mind to meditate, and to reflect and think about the meaning of the teaching, and if you can understand what the world is really like, then you can make the same progress as with other people. So the excellence that I'm talking about, and that the Buddhists are talking about, is the kind of excellence that can eliminate eventually your suffering. And in this cases, you know, being physically disabled is not an obstacle at all. That's a great question. Have to think about this more, but but this is what I'm thinking.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 33:16

Yeah. Especially when you think about programming robots? And like, are we going to programme disabled robots to reflect the extension of disabled people? Or it's, it's a more complex question about like, what kind of future Yes, yes. And as we're wrapping up, I wanted to ask, what are you working on right now,

Soraj Hongladarom 33:35

right now I'm writing a paper on the differences among AI ethics guidelines in various countries. It's not strictly philosophical, I have found myself working on more interdisciplinary subjects. But the core idea is still philosophical, because it's a it's a comparative comparison, and analysis of the maybe political motivation for these differences in AI Fe guidelines. This one paper I'm working on, and I will present this paper had an online, you know, everything is online right now. But there's a group at Oxford doing this kind of thing and they organise a seminar in philosophy of technology. And another project, which I have been putting off for a long, long, long time is to look at Spinoza and Buddhism, and I talked about my mandatory retirement at the beginning of our conversation, and perhaps when I am really retired, I can sit, you know, my time and effort into working more intensively on this this topic could come out as a book, who knows and I let you know, but but

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 35:00

Oh, yes, I will definitely want to know.

Soraj Hongladarom 35:02

Yes. In both in ethics and in epistemology and metaphysics.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 35:08

Well, everything is connected, of course, yes. And so I always ask my guests, what are you reading right now in philosophy or not in philosophy that you would like to share? Because it's really interesting.

Soraj Hongladarom 35:20

Yes, I just finished reading a biography of, you know, John Maynard Keynes, you know, British economist, because he is interesting, in the sense that he, you know, because things in Thailand are changing very rapidly. And we have had political demonstrations and upheavals for many years. And among these changes, you know, economic policies. So in my spare time, because I'm being locked down, and my university is closed, and I'm prevented, too from entering my office. So I just finished reading that one. And another book is connected with my work on Buddhism and Spinoza on philosophy of the self just coming out from the University of Hawaii. So I've been reading than one to have so many books in my Kindle. And then I, I read a bit of this and a bit of that, and I listen to audiobooks. And so the one on chains was read to me, you know, in from Audible.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 36:28

Yeah, I do like nonfiction audiobooks. Yeah, me too. Very good. Yeah. So where can people find you and your work on the internet?

Soraj Hongladarom 36:37

Yes, my Twitter handle is @sonamsangbo. It's my Tibetan name given to me by a Tibetan monk. And you can follow me on my Twitter, and I am very active on Facebook. Mostly, I post in Thailand with you know, communicating with my Thai friends and colleagues commenting on everything happening there. You can have a look, just go to facebook.com/suraj, my first name Ali, my first name, and you can you can also Google my name, and then you can find other other social media that I have accounts on so but it's mostly on Twitter and Facebook.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 37:20

Great. Yeah. And hopefully, we'll have some Thai listeners who would like to engage with you, as well. So thank you, again, so much, sir, for meeting with me and having this discussion. And I look forward to keeping up with your work and to see what you're going to do after your retirement. So I wish you a good day.

Soraj Hongladarom 37:39

Okay. Thank you. Bye. Thank you. Bye bye, bye.

Élaina Gauthier-Mamaril 37:53

Thank you for listening to my chat with Soraj. I hope you enjoy this as much as I did. As usual, I will put a link to Soraj's book the ethics of AI and robotics, a Buddhist viewpoint in the show notes as well as his Twitter handle. You can follow the show on Twitter and Instagram @philoCCpod. If you would like to recommend a guest or if you have any questions about the show, you can email me at philosophycastingcallpod@gmail.com and you can listen to my other podcast Bookshelf Remix, as well as my new Gilmore Girl podcast, Women of Questionable Morals, which you can find on Instagram and Twitter. Thank you, and until next time!

Transcribed by https://otter.ai