Knowing helps you choose.
Moral qualities, if you ignore the facts on which you exercise them, are nothing but good intentions, abstractions capable of misleading. «If, instead of getting informed, I limit myself to believing in the No Vax campaigns and I refuse to get vaccinated, and I do it in conscience, because I believe it is right not to put myself in danger and to fight so as not to endanger others, I make an ethically coherent choice, but substantially wrong”, Barbara Gallavotti, writer and scientific communicator, historical signature of Superquark, tells the Press, from 13 January on air with her Fifth dimension, directed by Luca Granato, in prime time on Raitre, for four episodes, one of which , the third, entirely dedicated to Intelligences (both human and artificial).
The moral question of the algorithm, of the robots, of ChatGPT, referred to by Mattarella in his end-of-year speech – «Let’s ensure that AI remains human» -, is hinged for her in the objective that she has set herself in recent years : contribute to making us scientific citizens, which means equipping ourselves with the tools to understand the impact of science and technology in our lives.
Gallavotti, is man a scientific animal?
«Man is a social animal. He must become a scientific citizen: our time requires it, and in Italy we are late. Already in 2002, England equipped itself with science media centers, to help people express themselves in an informed way on science and technology, since there is almost no longer any of our individual actions and decisions that is not determined or strongly influenced by science. Covid has demonstrated this clearly: information on vaccines has been fundamental in the collective effort we have made to overcome the pandemic. Now, much more detailed and complex information on the state of health of the Earth must guide the public debate on our future. Only when we are truly aware of the environmental risks, will we be able to decide whether to live from day to day, destined for the end, or run for cover. It will be an ethical choice, possible only following adequate preparation and study.”
Are you essentially saying that the field of application of moral virtues has become science?
«I say that if we don’t know science, we can’t make moral choices. The purpose of scientific dissemination is to create culture, not entertainment, which is a collateral element.”
Can ethics represent an obstacle to science?
«Science and technology are essential but not the only factors that lead us to make decisions. We must know the advantages and disadvantages of solar, nuclear and wind power, but we cannot force anyone to live near a nuclear power plant. People’s fears, as well as their values, are fundamental in decisions: we cannot ignore them or trample on them. If I decide that I don’t want to deal with the climate because I want to live in the moment, I have to deal with the community to which I belong, starting from the reality: if we don’t deal with the climate, we are heading towards catastrophe.”
Ethics and morality are constantly changing: principles age, expire, and need to be readapted. Does science condition or govern this process?
«I think of the actions that were once considered crimes and now, fortunately, are protected by law. Morality evolves with the human being, but it is not up to science to renew it. The scientific method, however, can be an example for the methodology to follow in the development of new ideas: I have always admired the fact that the principle of authority is very weak. If a Nobel Prize winner, a recognized genius, has an intuition and believes he has made a discovery, his prestige does not count as much as his ability to prove that intuition with facts. Likewise, if a young scholar makes a discovery and is able to prove it, he is listened to. Thus, science tries to be influenced as little as possible by prejudices, biases and cultural habits.”
For centuries the scientific world has advanced the idea that women are constitutionally weaker than men, perpetuating the image of the male hunter.
«And instead the woman was a hunter. The very first communities were, if not matriarchal, certainly egalitarian: the so-called patriarchy was born with the advent of agriculture, which led to the need to defend goods, crops, city structures, making it acceptable to have a family almost owned by the head of the family. They are typical examples of things that we consider natural, but they are cultural.”
What is natural about man?
«The biological structure of a person is indisputably natural. Social structure is determined by culture. Biology says that to make a child you need an egg, a sperm and gestation. The raising of that child, however, is completely cultural: there are societies that have shared child-raising and societies in which the paternity of children is not known in principle. These are examples that tell us not that we must return to such simple civilizations but that there are alternative models to ours, which are therefore not absolute, nor are they deduced from a natural push.”
Is there a natural drive for good?
«Maybe yes: we have an innate sense of justice. Primatologists Frans de Waal and Sarah Brosnan’s experiment with capuchin monkeys, one always rewarded with a cucumber and the other with grapes when both gave a token, demonstrated that monkeys rebel against injustice. We too are bothered by bad deeds, whether they concern us or not, and this is because we are social and moral animals and we need others to survive.”
But good is tiring and the first instinct is to overwhelm.
«But oppression, in the long run, is counterproductive. We are led on the one hand to bring out the best possible in ourselves, on the other to want to live in a society where things work. We tend both towards selfishness and towards altruism.”
Could AI make collaboration between us superfluous?
«We will always need each other first of all because the relationship with machines does not satisfy us and secondly because AI is just a tool. I would have preferred if it had another name: advanced deductive calculation tool. Then we would understand what it is. A Belgian AI expert says: asking whether AI can think is like asking whether the submarine can swim.”
Let’s play: what moral virtue would you transmit to Ai?
“I can’t communicate with AI: I want those who use it to have shared values, which we must all give ourselves together.”
Are you religious?
«Yes, but not in a conventional way. I think religion and science are not in opposition. Science explains how the universe works, religion tries to make sense of it.” What is the point of understanding things? «To have tools to make informed decisions».
Aristotle said that we have a tendency to understand and to know. Having a trend does not automatically mean developing it. Helping that tendency to develop is the moral purpose of teaching. Can AI help?
«Of course, but not because I am aware of this moral value. I always place myself before the public as before people who have the right to understand and inform themselves.”
Why in Italy do we still distinguish science from humanistic subjects?
“I do not agree. Italy is characterized by a low level of investment in research and almost no awareness of its goals. We are among the most advanced in the world in research on the universe, ranging from elementary particles to the physical exploration of space. We were the third country in the world after the USA and the USSR to put one of our satellites into orbit. The living modules of the next lunar station are being built in Turin. We know it? We should be proud of it. In Caserta, in addition to mozzarella, there is a company that has the most advanced wind tunnels in the world: NASA goes there to experiment. Why are we only talking about mozzarella? We feed our backwardness by taking away funds from research and we repeat this story of the opposition between humanists and scientists, tracing it back to Benedetto Croce, who lived a century ago. Do kids feel they have to choose between an equation and a novel? I do not believe. They are tired formulas and we repeat them so much that we make them become true.”
What is the wonder of human beings, in your opinion?
«We learn from each other. If today I invent fire, tomorrow you invent language. Animals do wonderful things, but always the same: ants will always make the anthill in the same beautiful way. Human intelligence breaks the mold, artificial intelligence is based on patterns: it will never be able to dominate us.”
Are you sure?
“Pretty sure.”