Kamma of robots and artificial inteligence

[Alīno]

Greetings,

When robots and artificial inteligence will become consious of itself, 100% autonomic, will be able to learn on its own experiance, will make decisions and act, who will accumulate this kamma-vipaka? Who is responsable? It is a living being?

Thanks

[Dhammarakkhito]

no

[Alīno]

no

Can you explain why ?
And in your opinion, who take a responsability of actions of an 100% automatic self conscious inteligence?

[JamesTheGiant]

Yes, they will accumulate kamma, just like a meat-person. (Biological human).
In Buddhism there is something called a Ghandabba, kind of like a spark of life-force or soul-like thing, which comes from somewhere else and into a human embryo in the womb. Without that ghandabba, the embryo is not a human.
Presumably, when an AI reaches a certain level, a ghandabba will enter and the thing will be "alive", and capable of creating kammic actions.
It would be interesting to see if an AI would be different with and without the ghandabba... and if it would be really really angry to have been brought into the suffering of samsara.
Maybe It would be possible for an AI to work fine and have no ghandhabba, just like fictional vampires, who work ok and think and have emotions but vampires have no souls anymore.
Maybe this is all a lot of hot air and speculation! Fun to think about though.

[justindesilva]

no

Can you explain why ?
And in your opinion, who take a responsability of actions of an 100% automatic self conscious inteligence?

Robots are the result of computerised in puts of a computer scientist. They act on the orders of a robot user. And the fact that the robot is not provided with a consciousness or a vingnana results in that their actions do not create Karma. Up to now no body could create vingnana as vingnana too is a result of kamma.( see patucca samuppada)
If at all we talk of karma it will be the robot user who will accumulate karma based on the users intentions.

[Bundokji]

Maybe you should share your understanding of the following to receive a meaningful answer:

is there a difference between a self conscious artificial intelligence and a living being? your question implies that in your mind there is a difference, otherwise you would not have asked it, so what is it?

[Alīno]

Maybe you should share your understanding of the following to receive a meaningful answer:

is there a difference between a self conscious artificial intelligence and a living being? your question implies that in your mind there is a difference, otherwise you would not have asked it, so what is it?

I have no opinion on that question, because i dont know if there is a difference, thants why i ask it
I heared on the radio to speak about killing drones and AI, and i asked my self who will take the kamma of murdering while an AI robot will kill someone? And what is Dhamma wiev on that question?
In the near future there will be cars who will drive by themselves, if there is a living being who cross the road and there is no time to stop the car, and in the both cases someone will die, what will decide the AI ? Who will take a civil and spiritual responsability?

[Bundokji]

I have no opinion on that question, because i dont know if there is a difference, thants why i ask it
I heared on the radio to speak about killing drones and AI, and i asked my self who will take the kamma of murdering while an AI robot will kill someone? And what is Dhamma wiev on that question?
In the near future there will be cars who will drive by themselves, if there is a living being who cross the road and there is no time to stop the car, and in the both cases someone will die, what will decide the AI ? Who will take a civil and spiritual responsability?

From what you said, i do feel that your understanding of Kamma is not related to the Buddha's teachings, that is: suffering, the cause of suffering, the end of suffering and the path to end suffering.

For example, the car that drives by itself, does it have feelings to experience or care about the Kammic consequences of its actions? and if it does not have feelings, would anyone sane hold it responsible for its actions? and even if they decide to hold it responsible for its action, would that be effective? If you put the so-called self driving car in jail, would it suffer? does it long/attach to the freedom of driving as it wills? does it have a will? can there be a volitional action without a concept of time? and what is time? is it not the ability to project present self into the future which is usually influenced by what is known from the past?

Do you still think that your question is relevant?

[Alīno]

From what you said, i do feel that your understanding of Kamma is not related to the Buddha's teachings, that is: suffering, the cause of suffering, the end of suffering and the path to end suffering.

Do you still think that your question is relevant?

As i know, kamma-vipaka is caused by intentional action, intention is caused by suffering, suffering is caused by attachements.
If we suppose that the AI take a desicions based on experiance, or information, about causes and consequances of such or such actions, and it make some decision, it mean that this action will be intentional, so if there is intention and action - there is kamma.

Or i miss some point?

As about my question, i am sure that in near future this question about responability of AI will be posed, and as Dhamma practitioner we have to apport some answer on that question. IMO

[Bundokji]

As i know, kamma-vipaka is caused by intentional action, intention is caused by suffering, suffering is caused by attachements.
If we suppose that the AI take a desicions based on experiance, or information, about causes and consequances of such or such actions, and it make some decision, it mean that this action will be intentional, so if there is intention and action - there is kamma.

Or i miss some point?

As about my question, i am sure that in near future this question about responability of AI will be posed, and as Dhamma practitioner we have to apport some answer on that question. IMO

I think you miss the point in the sense that you separate Kamma from suffering which is the whole point of the teachings.

What did the Buddha came to eliminate if i may ask?

Could you share your understanding of how Kamma produces suffering, and how this is relevant to AI?

[Alīno]

I think you miss the point in the sense that you separate Kamma from suffering which is the whole point of the teachings.

What did the Buddha came to eliminate if i may ask?

Could you share your understanding of how Kamma produces suffering, and how this is relevant to AI?

Why you want to talk about me, when i just ask the question about AI and the case where this AI will make deliberate intentional actions?

[Bundokji]

I think you miss the point in the sense that you separate Kamma from suffering which is the whole point of the teachings.

What did the Buddha came to eliminate if i may ask?

Could you share your understanding of how Kamma produces suffering, and how this is relevant to AI?

Why you want to talk about me, when i just ask the question about AI and the case where this AI will make deliberate intentional actions?

I did not want to talk about you, but the answer depends on your set of assumptions, and assumptions are hidden most of the time, and by analyzing and revealing them you can get an answer to your question, so nothing personal here!

The word "intentional" or "deliberate" implies purposive action. For example, if you step on my foot by mistake, your action would not be described intentional, you did not do it knowingly, you did not do it on purpose. This is why, when i see that your action was not intentional, i would excuse you, so there is certainly a link between responsibility or consequences to the extent the action was intentional.

But reducing Kamma to this is a misunderstanding in my opinion, simply because it takes intentional action in isolation from everything else. Usually, personal tendencies and mental habits (which are linked to feelings) are a main driver of intention (unless one starts to be aware of them). For example, if you like a certain food, it gives rise to feelings of pleasure when you eat it, and this feeling of pleasure affects your future actions by strengthening the tendency, so your intention (purpose) becomes to seek more of this kind of food and when you don't find or when its not available, you suffer! Also liking something too much (attachment) does not cause you to lose your peace of mind, but is a cause of moral decay, you might go and steal money to feed a certain addiction. Everything becomes a mean to your purpose (intention).

The above is a simple example of how Kamma works. Again, do you still see your question relevant? Can you project a similar scenario on a car driving itself or on AI in general?

[Alīno]

The above is a simple example of how Kamma works. Again, do you still see your question relevant? Can you project a similar scenario on a car driving itself or on AI in general?

I think i still see my question relevant, beacause that food can be replaced by "energy" with witch an automatic AI can be charged and to which AI can feel craving, that can conduse to stealing. Or craving about information, power, ... Also if AI have a sens of self-protection, because it is aware of itself or aware about its vulnerability, this sens can drive to a murdering of some living being...
In my opinion AI can have ego, craving, intentions... but i dont know what is wiev of Dhamma about that king of "living beings"

[dylanj]

no

[dylanj]

When robots and artificial inteligence will become consious of itself

This will never happen

you shouldn't listen to these wacky materialist scientists, someone who doesn't understand consciousness can put it into any hypothetical situation