Stephen Fry warns of ethical crisis in AI in final episode of What I Believe

Renowned actor, writer, and Humanists UK patron Stephen Fry offers a compelling and characteristically witty exploration of his core beliefs in the final episode of Humanists UK’s What I Believe podcast. Drawing inspiration from the likes of E M  Forster and Bertrand Russell, Stephen discusses the profound importance of intellectual uncertainty, the origins of our moral compass, and the intriguing dichotomy between individual human nature and the collective mass.

The podcast explores the beliefs and values of well-known humanists – campaigners, artists, writers, and entertainers who are ‘good without gods’. 

In a wide-ranging conversation, Stephen Fry champions uncertainty as a crucial intellectual and almost moral value. Rejecting rigid dogma and doctrine, he states:

‘I don’t need to explain why certainty is wrong by any logical or metaphysical twists and turns. I can just say, ‘Look at what happens when people are certain’… People of certainty have nearly always, as far as I can see, got us into trouble.’

Fry also reflects on the seemingly innate human sense of right and wrong, positing that this intrinsic moral sense transcends religious doctrine:

‘It’s so much the whole chorus of humanity that instinctively understands that stealing is wrong, that lying is wrong, murder is wrong, meanness is wrong, cruelty is wrong, betrayal is, deceit and all that. We just seem to know it. We certainly don’t need to be told it by a hierophant or a priest! I’ve always been aware of that. I can remember when my very beloved grandfather, I really imagined him looking down on me and when I did something dreadful, I thought, ‘My God, it’s my grandfather watching me!’’

‘Those of us who have been active in some ways within humanism, and within atheism and so on, are most particularly annoyed by the claim of religion, that without it, there would be no moral sense, because that just is empirically nonsensical, and rationally nonsensical too … 

‘There is this idea that you need a god in order to guide your hand and I think, looking around the world, we can see that it is something that is apparently inborn. One could look for the solutions, as we love to do, through evolutionary psychology and ethology, and all the ways that we try to understand how our behaviour genetically, and now epigenetically, is modified by what happens to us, and the circumstances of our growth and progress as a species and as the various… the family, the group, the clan, the tribe, the race – however one wants to expand the identity of who we are. I suppose the question is really, and this is where we get to the Greeks, is happiness. We want to be happy, that’s pretty obvious. It’s best seen in how much we try to avoid unhappiness, perhaps. The lengths we go to, to avoid being miserable if we can. And the question that exercised the Greeks was, whether you could be happy if you were not virtuous?’

The discussion also touches upon the intriguing paradox of human behaviour – the stark difference between the individual and the mass:

‘I’m sure most of us face this strange sense that the human race is almost like a series of rabid dogs in a cage. And you get too close to the cage and the fierce yapping, barking, the slathering, and the horror of this creature, is what you get an impression of humanity being. But when you go out into the streets, or you sit next to someone on a bus, or in the pub, or you chat to them, it’s the opposite: everyone seems individually to be reasonable, kind of humorous, resigned about the mess of the world, not completely having swallowed a red pill or blue pill. There’s a kind of openness… not all, of course – there are those who swallow all kinds of pills and conspiracy theories, and others who are loaded with prejudice against certain groups of people and all the rest of it. But generally speaking, it’s so hard not to think that if you wanted to look at it in a gardening sort of way, all the human seeds that you want to plant in the garden, there are only about 2% that ‘Oh, that’s a bit mouldy, throw that one away’. The rest are really good and will grow into wonderful flowers.’

Addressing the challenges of artificial intelligence (AI), Stephen discusses his concerns that near universal perspectives on equality long fought for could be fractured by prejudiced AI models: 

‘What worries me about AI is everybody says it’s taken us hundreds of years to realise that all human lives are of equal value and that women are of equal value to men, and people of different races and outlooks and upbringing are of equal value, and there isn’t a hierarchy of worth amongst humanity. And therefore you must bake those values into AI so that Chat GPT and others, when they’re scraping data from the internet, if they come across data that suggests women are inferior to men from somewhere, they must have an instinct, a prime directive to ignore that… But we forget that Russia and China have their own AI. They have a totally different ethical framework, one in which the citizen is  subjugated to their duties to the state, and they should report neighbours who misbehave and mock the Supreme Leader. ‘And suggesting that one AI can’t sort of infiltrate another is like saying, “If I put the yellow dye in the Pacific, I haven’t put it in the Atlantic.” Well, there’s only one ocean on Earth actually. And there’s only one sort of internet really. There are firewalls and national attempts to control bits, but generally speaking,  we have to be very aware of the fact that… and this is the bit that’s so depressing for cowards like me, is that these values that you’ve very perfectly expressed, may have to be fought for.’

Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, commented:

‘It was a pleasure as always to speak to Stephen for the What I Believe podcast. His insights on everything from our innate moral compass to the perplexing dichotomy between individual human nature and the collective mass offer a characteristically witty and profoundly humanist perspective on the human condition. I hope listeners enjoy hearing the episode in full!’

What I Believe is a podcast exploring the values, beliefs, and worldviews of non-religious people in the public eye. Previous guests include Sandi Toksvig, Tim Minchin, Alice Roberts, and Jim Al-Khalili. It is chaired by Humanists UK’s Chief Executive Andrew Copson.

Listeners are encouraged to tune in and subscribe to the podcast for a unique insight into the varied life stories and perspectives of humanists, whose view of life is shaped by reason, compassion, and evidence. What I Believe is available on all major podcast platforms.