IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/utilit/v36y2024i1p50-63_4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Intersubstrate Welfare Comparisons: Important, Difficult, and Potentially Tractable

Author

Listed:
  • Fischer, Bob
  • Sebo, Jeff

Abstract

In the future, when we compare the welfare of a being of one substrate (say, a human) with the welfare of another (say, an artificial intelligence system), we will be making an intersubstrate welfare comparison. In this paper, we argue that intersubstrate welfare comparisons are important, difficult, and potentially tractable. The world might soon contain a vast number of sentient or otherwise significant beings of different substrates, and moral agents will need to be able to compare their welfare levels. However, this work will be difficult, because we lack the same kinds of commonalities across substrates that we have within them. Fortunately, we might be able to make at least some intersubstrate welfare comparisons responsibly in spite of these issues. We make the case for cautious optimism and call for more research.

Suggested Citation

  • Fischer, Bob & Sebo, Jeff, 2024. "Intersubstrate Welfare Comparisons: Important, Difficult, and Potentially Tractable," Utilitas, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 50-63, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:36:y:2024:i:1:p:50-63_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0953820823000286/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:utilit:v:36:y:2024:i:1:p:50-63_4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/uti .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.