SOCIETY is at a “pivotal moment” in the development of artificial intelligence (AI), the Bishop of Oxford, Dr Steven Croft, told the House of Lords on Monday.
The challenges posed by AI require “rich dialogue across society”, he said, and called for ethical questions to be central to the discussions.
“Will the Government underline their commitment to the precautionary principle as a counterweight to the unrestrained development of technology, because of the risks of harm?” he asked.
“Will we mind the widening gap between technology and ethics for the sake of human flourishing into the future?”
The debate was formally moved by Lord Ravensdale, a hereditary peer and engineer, but he noted that others had put forward submissions on the same topic, including a former Bishop of Oxford, Lord Harries.
In a speech during the debate, Lord Harries expressed “grave concerns” about the current frameworks for monitoring the use and development of AI.
“It is far too vague, and, with its stress on innovation, there is a real danger of some of the ethical concerns simply being sidelined,” he said. He referred to the way in which AI could increase the spread of misinformation as one means by which it could have a deleterious effect on society.
There were good arguments for embracing innovation, Lord Harries said, especially given the benefits that AI could bring in medical diagnosis and research; but, in other sectors, such as the military, it needed to be closely regulated.
He suggested that a “central body” was needed to “monitor developments and then to raise any ethical concern”. This body could co-ordinate sector-specific regulatory systems.
In a recent White Paper, the Government outlined its aim to foster a “pro-innovation approach to AI regulation”. A new Foundation Model Taskforce has been established, with £100 million of public funds, and will be “responsible for accelerating the UK’s capability” in developing and harnessing AI.
On Monday, Lord Harries asked the Government to give the Taskforce a “much clearer remit both to monitor developments across the field and to raise potential ethical concerns”.
A former Bishop of London, Lord Chartres, also contributed to the debate, and outlined some of the ways in which AI was being used “in matters spiritual”, such as AI-powered virtual “priests”.
Last month, a conference at Westminster brought together policymakers, faith leaders, and academics to discuss faith and AI, and heard views that ranged from optimistic to doom-laden (News, 23 June).
On Monday, Lord Chartres said that, while AI might be able to simulate human emotions, “it has no spirit.”
The increasing focus on technical subjects in the education system was not a bad thing in itself, he said, but there was a danger that “if educational opportunities and landscapes are narrowed excessively, human beings in our society will have fewer and fewer places from which to mount a critique of the technological system.”
Responding to the debate, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology, Lord Camrose, said that “unless our regulatory approach addresses the significant risks caused or amplified by AI, the public will not trust the technology and we will fail to maximise the opportunities it presents.”
He acknowledged the concerns about ethics raised by Dr Croft and Lord Harries, and said that the Government’s approach was grounded in “concepts such as fairness, transparency, and accountability”.