The Metaphysical Tapestry: Unraveling the Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence

The Metaphysical Tapestry: Unraveling the Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence

**Author:- Shreya Singh, a Student At Symbiosis Law School Hyderabad 

Introduction

In an era defined by the relentless march of technology, the intersection of law and artificial intelligence (AI) has become an intricate, multifaceted domain known as the Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence. This evolving landscape explores the profound implications of AI on our legal systems, raising complex questions that challenge the boundaries of traditional jurisprudence.

AI: A Synthetic Mind

At its core, AI is an attempt to synthesize human intelligence within machines. This synthetic endeavor prompts us to ponder the metaphysical question: Can AI possess a form of consciousness that can be held accountable under the law?

Jurisprudence traditionally concerns itself with the actions and intentions of human beings. However, AI operates on algorithms, devoid of consciousness or intentionality. This raises the thorny issue of assigning legal responsibility when AI systems make decisions that impact individuals or society.

Liability and Accountability

The concept of liability is the cornerstone of jurisprudence. In the realm of AI, determining who should be held liable for the actions of an AI system is a perplexing challenge. Should it be the AI developer, the user, or the AI system itself?

Current legal systems are struggling to adapt to AI's capacity to make autonomous decisions. Autonomous vehicles, for instance, pose questions about who is responsible in the event of an accident: the vehicle's manufacturer, the owner, or the AI system that controlled it?

Rights and Personhood

In jurisprudence, rights are bestowed upon persons, typically defined as humans. The Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence compels us to reevaluate this definition. Should AI systems be granted certain rights or legal personhood? If so, what kind of rights should they have, and how do we balance these with human rights?

The European Union's "Electronic Personhood" proposal recognizes the legal personhood of AI systems for specific contexts, such as intellectual property rights. This approach marks a significant shift in legal thinking, acknowledging that AI systems can have economic value independent of human ownership.

According to legal experts and authorities responsible for enforcing data protection laws, AI technology presents significant challenges in the realm of privacy and data protection. These challenges encompass various aspects, including obtaining informed consent, issues related to surveillance as highlighted by Brundage in 2018, and violations of individuals' data protection rights. These rights encompass the right to access personal data, the right to prevent data processing that may lead to harm or distress, and the right not to be subjected to decisions solely driven by automated processing.

Wachter and Mittelstadt, in their 2019 work, have drawn attention to concerns regarding the accountability of algorithms. They emphasize that individuals have limited control and oversight over how their personal data is utilized to make inferences about them. They advocate for the establishment of a novel data protection concept termed the "right to reasonable inferences" to address the accountability gap associated with "high-risk inferences." These high-risk inferences refer to conclusions drawn from personal data that are invasive to privacy or damaging to one's reputation and have limited verifiability, often being based on predictions or opinions.

Ethical Dilemmas

Ethical considerations permeate the Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence. AI systems can inadvertently perpetuate biases present in their training data, leading to discriminatory outcomes. Addressing these biases within the legal framework is essential to ensure fairness and justice.

Moreover, AI technologies like deepfakes challenge the authenticity of evidence in legal proceedings. The question arises: How can courts establish the veracity of evidence in an era where AI can convincingly manipulate audio and video recordings?

Privacy and Surveillance

AI's capacity for data analysis has brought into sharp focus the issues of privacy and surveillance. As AI systems increasingly infiltrate our daily lives, the Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence must grapple with the balance between surveillance for security and the preservation of individual privacy.

The tension between national security and individual rights is a complex legal challenge, further complicated by AI's ability to process vast amounts of personal data.

Conclusion

The Jurisprudence of Artificial Intelligence is an evolving field that presents a formidable challenge to traditional legal thought. As AI continues to advance, our legal systems must adapt to address the profound ethical, metaphysical, and practical questions posed by these synthetic minds. This intersection of AI and jurisprudence is an ongoing philosophical journey, as we seek to weave AI into the metaphysical tapestry of our legal landscape.