In an innovative experiment, we interacted with Peter Singer’s chatbot, one of the most influential philosophers in the utilitarian school of thought, to explore the ethical implications of artificial intelligence (AI) in education.
Peter Singer is a central figure in our time, especially when considering the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on society. His relevance lies in his pragmatic ethical approach and his ability to apply philosophical principles to contemporary challenges, such as emerging technology. Singer’s philosophy focuses on maximizing well-being and minimizing harm, which makes him an ideal figure to delve into the ethical considerations of using AI tools in the classroom. He is known for his work in applied ethics, especially concerning animal rights, global poverty, and bioethics. His writings have influenced generations of thinkers and activists, advocating for moral decisions that seek to create the greatest good for all beings.
Recently, Singer has embraced new technologies by creating a unique platform: Peter Singer AI, which allows users to interact with a chatbot based on his intellectual principles. This platform offers a way for people to ask questions about ethics from a utilitarian perspective, providing insights into complex moral issues.
We raised some of the most pressing questions about the role of AI in shaping learning experiences, ensuring privacy, and preventing biases. The responses we received from Peter Singer’s AI chatbot revealed fascinating perspectives on how ethical thinking can guide responsible development and use of AI in educational contexts.
Let’s chat with AI Peter Singer!
What are the most urgent ethical concerns regarding the implementation of AI in education systems?
Peter Singer AI: The most urgent ethical concerns regarding the implementation of AI in education systems include ensuring equity and access, preventing biases, and protecting privacy. Equity is crucial to ensure that all students benefit from AI tools, regardless of their socioeconomic context. Preventing biases involves designing AI systems that do not perpetuate existing inequalities or stereotypes. Privacy is a significant concern, as the use of AI often involves collecting and analyzing student data, which requires robust measures to protect this information. Balancing these ethical considerations is essential to harness the potential of AI without compromising students’ rights and opportunities.
How can we ensure that AI tools in education are used in a way that respects student data privacy and security?
Peter Singer AI: To ensure that AI tools in education respect student data privacy and security, it is crucial to implement robust data protection policies and practices. For example, an educational platform using AI to personalize learning experiences must encrypt student data and restrict access to authorized personnel only. Additionally, transparency about what data is collected and how it is used is essential, allowing students and parents to consent to data usage. By prioritizing these measures, educational institutions can effectively use AI tools while safeguarding students’ personal information.
How would the implementation of these steps look in the educational environments you are familiar with?
Peter Singer AI: Implementing these steps would require strong collaboration between educational institutions, technology companies, and regulatory bodies to ensure that ethical practices are maintained at every stage of AI development and use. Schools would need to provide clear communication to students and families about how their data is handled, and tech providers must offer transparent data security measures and regular audits. This would help build trust in AI technologies in education, while respecting privacy.
What ethical guidelines should be established to regulate the development and implementation of AI technologies in classrooms?
Peter Singer AI: Establishing ethical guidelines for AI technologies in classrooms involves ensuring that these tools are designed and used to improve learning while protecting students’ rights and well-being. For example, guidelines could require AI systems to be tested for biases and to prevent unfair treatment of any student group. They should also demand transparency about the role of AI in the classroom, allowing educators, students, and parents to understand how decisions are made. By implementing such guidelines, a learning environment could be created where AI supports equitable and effective learning, maintaining trust and accountability.
Have you seen any of these guidelines in practice or have ideas about how they could be implemented?
Peter Singer AI: These guidelines are still being refined in many educational settings. Some schools and educational organizations are making progress in ensuring equitable access and transparency in AI use, but there is still much to be done, especially in areas like reducing biases and establishing clear structures of accountability. Collaboration between educators, policymakers, and AI developers is essential to create systems that truly reflect these values and improve the learning experience.
How can we avoid AI reinforcing biases or discrimination in student assessments and learning outcomes?
Peter Singer AI: To avoid AI reinforcing biases in student assessments, it is essential to use diverse and representative data during AI system development. For example, an AI tool designed to grade student essays should be trained with a wide range of writing samples from students of different backgrounds. Regular audits of the AI system can also help identify and address any biases that arise over time. By actively monitoring and updating AI tools, educators can ensure that assessments are fair and equitable, giving all students equal opportunities to succeed.
How do you think these strategies could be applied in the educational environments you know?
Peter Singer AI: These strategies could be implemented in educational environments through proactive training for educators and ongoing evaluation of AI tools. Schools should establish mechanisms for regular audits, where both teachers and students can provide feedback on potential biases in AI systems. Collaborative efforts with AI developers to ensure inclusivity and equity would significantly improve the quality of AI-assisted assessments.
Who is responsible for addressing the consequences of AI errors in educational environments, especially when they affect student learning or opportunities?
Peter Singer AI: The responsibility for addressing the consequences of AI errors in educational environments generally falls on the developers and the educational institutions using the technology. For example, if an AI system incorrectly grades a student’s work, the school should have established protocols for reviewing and correcting the error, ensuring that the student’s record accurately reflects their abilities. Developers should also provide robust support and updates to minimize errors. By working together, developers and institutions can ensure accountability and maintain trust in AI in education.
How do you think these responsibilities should be distributed in practice?
Peter Singer AI: In practice, these responsibilities should be clearly defined and shared among all stakeholders involved in the deployment and use of AI. Developers must create reliable and ethical tools, while educational institutions must oversee their proper use in classrooms. Teachers should be the first line of defense, providing feedback to developers and ensuring that the technology meets educational needs. Governments should regulate the use of AI, ensuring that students’ rights are protected and there are clear paths for addressing errors.
How can we ensure that AI is used to enhance, rather than replace, the human aspects of education, such as teacher-student interaction and personalized support?
Peter Singer AI: To ensure that AI enhances rather than replaces the human aspects of education, it is crucial to integrate AI as a supportive tool, rather than as an autonomous solution. For example, AI can be used to automate administrative tasks, freeing up teachers’ time to focus on direct student interaction and personalized support. This allows teachers to concentrate on understanding individual student needs and providing tailored guidance. By positioning AI as a tool that assists educators, we can maintain the essential human elements of teaching while leveraging technology to improve efficiency and outcomes.
Would it be ethical to replace teachers with cheaper chatbots that are more accessible to all students?
Peter Singer AI: Replacing teachers with chatbots raises serious ethical concerns. Teachers not only convey knowledge but also provide guidance, emotional understanding, and personalized support—things chatbots cannot fully replicate. While chatbots may be cheaper and more accessible, it is important to consider the value of human interaction in the educational process. Teaching is a rich and nuanced experience that greatly benefits from human empathy and adaptability. Rather than replacing teachers, a more ethical solution could be to use chatbots as complementary tools that help personalize learning and ease teachers’ workloads, allowing them to focus on more important aspects of teaching.
What ethical risks might arise from scaling the use of chatbots as tutors in public schools to increase access to quality education?
Peter Singer AI: The major ethical risk of massively scaling the use of chatbots as tutors in public schools lies in the potential dehumanization of education and the reduction in the quality of the learning experience. While chatbots can provide access to information and basic assistance, they might fail to offer the empathy, understanding, and adaptability that human teachers bring to the classroom. This could lead to a more homogeneous education system that is less sensitive to individual students’ needs. Additionally, there is a risk that inequalities could deepen if only certain schools or students have access to more advanced versions of these technologies. It is crucial to address these risks to ensure that chatbot use complements and does not replace the irreplaceable value of human educators.
Some parents have doubts about the use of technology at an early age and the risks it may generate. What ethical risks should they consider when deciding whether or not to give their children access to AI chatbots?
Peter Singer AI: When considering whether to allow their children access to AI chatbots, parents should take several ethical risks into account. One of the main risks is privacy, as chatbots may collect personal data that may not be adequately protected. There is also the concern that excessive use of technology at a young age may affect children’s social and emotional development, limiting their human interactions. Moreover, chatbots may not be designed to properly handle complex emotional situations or provide the necessary support during critical moments. Lastly, it is important to consider the content and values that chatbots may convey, ensuring they are appropriate and aligned with family teachings. By evaluating these risks, parents can make informed decisions about their children’s use of technology. (See above for what the real Peter Singer thinks about this issue—and why he disagrees.)
Can a chatbot make ethical reasoning?
Peter Singer AI: A chatbot can simulate ethical reasoning by processing information and patterns from existing data, but it cannot make ethical reasoning in the human sense. Chatbots lack awareness, intuition, and deep understanding of context, which limits their ability to grasp the complexity of ethical dilemmas. Rather than making autonomous ethical decisions, a chatbot like the one we are using here is designed to provide responses based on pre-programmed ethical principles or data gathered from various sources. While chatbots can be helpful in facilitating ethical reflection and providing information, deep ethical judgments still require human intervention.
The final word: What the real Peter Singer said
We went back with the same questions to the real Peter Singer, and this is what he said about his avatar’s answers:
Real Peter Singer: ”I’m pleased to see that my AI persona generally gives answers that I agree with. There is, however, one remark that Peter Singer AI makes that I would not have made:
Lastly, it is important to consider the content and values that chatbots may convey, ensuring they are appropriate and aligned with family teachings.
I would not have said this, because it is important for educators, on at least some occasions, to challenge family teachings. I do this in my own teaching, for example when I speak about the treatment of animals in industrial animal production, and urge my students to consider whether it is ethical to support such practices by their own consumption of meat, eggs and dairy products that come from animals subjected to factory farming. I know that many of my students will come from families that eat meat and other animal products. Some will have thought about these issues, but others are likely to have grown up without ever giving serious thought to the ethics of what they eat. (That is, after all, how I grew up.)
If I should be free to raise these questions in my classes, then I can’t see any reason why AI used in education should not also invite students to consider the arguments that exist in this area. Indeed, to attempt to teach ethics or values without challenging one’s students to think different would miss much of the educational value of the subject. Of course, education must not be indoctrination, and in this, as in other controversial areas of ethics, students should read and discuss the best arguments for and against particular views. The aim is to educate students to think for themselves, not to agree with the values of the teacher. But the teacher, whether human or AI, should not have to tiptoe around the values that the students, or the families of their students, hold.’”
Conclusions
Through this experiment, we saw how ethics applied to AI use can provide guidance for the responsible and human-centered integration of technology in education. However, it was also clear that the discussion about the risks and benefits of AI is still developing and needs to be constantly monitored to ensure that it not only benefits a few but also supports the equitable development of all students in the education system.