Are current AI systems capable of well-being?

James FANCIULLO*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)peer-review

Abstract

Recently, Simon Goldstein and Cameron Domenico Kirk-Giannini have argued that certain existing AI systems are capable of well-being. They consider the three leading approaches to well-being—hedonism, desire satisfactionism, and the objective list approach—and argue that theories of these kinds plausibly imply that some current AI systems are capable of welfare. In this paper, I argue that the leading versions of each of these theories do not imply this. I conclude that we have strong reason to doubt that current AI systems are capable of well-being.
Original languageEnglish
Article number42
JournalAsian Journal of Philosophy
Volume4
Issue number1
Early online date15 Mar 2025
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 15 Mar 2025

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2025.

Funding

Open Access Publishing Support Fund provided by Lingnan University.

Keywords

  • Artificial intelligence
  • well-being
  • Welfare
  • Hedonism
  • Desire satisfactionism
  • Objective list theory
  • Well-being

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Are current AI systems capable of well-being?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this