机器拟人化的三条证成进路及其反思  

The Three Approaches of Justification Towards Anthropomorphism in Machines and Some Reflections on Them

作　　者：于雪 金琪雨 YU Xue;JIN Qiyu(School of Humanities,Dalian University of Technology,Dalian,Liaoning,116024;School of Philosophy,Renmin University of China,Beijing,100872)

机构地区：[1]大连理工大学人文学院,辽宁大连116024 [2]中国人民大学哲学院,北京100872

出　　处：《自然辩证法通讯》2024年第11期29-37,共9页Journal of Dialectics of Nature

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“当代新兴增强技术前沿的人文主义哲学研究”(项目编号:20&ZD044)。

摘　　要：随着机器设计水平的提升和社会应用场景的扩散,越来越多的机器被赋予了拟人化特征,由此引发了一系列对机器拟人化的辩护。主流的辩护观点可以被概括为三条证成进路:以布莱恩·达菲为代表的工具论证成进路、以路易莎·达米亚诺为代表的认知论证成进路和以马克·考科尔伯格为代表的关系论证成进路。基于这三条证成进路的共性与差异,可以从“设计-使用”语境以及人机关系图景两个层面剖析机器拟人化的发生逻辑和现实根源。此外,尽管以上三条证成进路回应并部分纾解了对机器拟人化的多种伦理质疑,但仍存在着诸如欺骗、可接受性、新型人机关系等伦理问题有待进一步澄清与应对。With the improvement of machine design and the proliferation of social application scenarios,more and more machines have been endowed with anthropomorphic features,which has led to a series of justifications for anthropomorphism in machines.The mainstream defenses can be summarized into three approaches to justifications:the instrumentalist approach represented by Brian Duffy,the cognitive approach represented by Louisa Damiano,and the relational approach represented by Mark Coeckelbergh.Based on the commonalities and differences of these three evidential approaches,the occurrence logic of machine anthropomorphism and its realistic roots can be analyzed from such two levels as the"design-use"context and the human-machine relationship scenarios.In addition,although the above three justification approaches have responded to and partially alleviated some ethical challenges to anthropomorphism in machines,there still remain some ethical challenges such as deception,acceptability,and new types of human-machine relationship,which need to be further clarified and addressed.

关 键 词：机器拟人化 人机关系 关系论 “设计-使用”语境 可接受性 

分 类 号：TP242[自动化与计算机技术—检测技术与自动化装置] B025.5[自动化与计算机技术—控制科学与工程]