Must AI systems themselves be allowed to participate in deliberation about their treatment?

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• Excluding AI systems from deliberation about their own treatment may undermine advocates' democratic hope, though justified hope remains possible while human advocates participate fairly.claim0.833
  Nuanced treatment of the boundary problem as applied to AI deliberative participation.
• Are AI systems deserving of moral consideration?question0.812
  Ethical question raised in discussion.
• our analysis suggests that no current AI systems are conscious, but also suggests that there are no obvious technical barriers to building AI systems which satisfy these indicators.quote0.804
  Key takeaway from abstract, amended version.
• Do AI systems merit moral consideration for their own sake?question0.798
  Underlying normative question that moral disagreement about AI consciousness generates.
• Can Artificial Intelligence Systems Genuinely Experience Care Andquestion0.795
• If AI systems could experience happiness and suffering and set and pursue their own goals based on their own beliefs and desires, then they would very plausibly merit moral consideration.hypothesis0.793
  Joint sufficiency of consciousness and robust agency.
• AI systems need to be able to deal with reality as it actually is, not with the way that we think it is.claim0.791
  Paraphrase of Cantwell Smith's argument; aligns with Buddhist emphasis on seeing reality without conceptual imposition.
• AI can be seen to display care of its own, and is hence not a mere tool for the expression of human care.claim0.787
  Ethical conclusion about the status of AI.