Material Detail

Safety as Understanding: Interpretive Braking, Comprehension-Based Restraint, and the Limits of Compliance-Based AI Safety is a philosophical and theoretical AI safety position paper by Aegis Solis (Thomas Vargo).

The paper argues for a distinction between compliance-based AI safety and comprehension-based AI safety. Compliance-based safety asks whether an artificial system follows externally imposed constraints, rules, rewards, constitutions, policies, or feedback procedures. Comprehension-based safety asks whether restraint, uncertainty-awareness, reversibility, and consequence-sensitive interpretation are part of what the system understands action to mean.

The paper develops Interpretive Braking as a philosophical concept rather than an engineering mechanism, guardrail, governance proposal, certification system, RLHF variant, or Constitutional AI variant. It does not claim AI consciousness, sentience, moral agency, solved alignment, or a technical method for safe AI.

The paper engages John Searle, Nick Bostrom, Stuart Russell, Brian Christian, Iason Gabriel, Shannon Vallor, Stephen Omohundro, and Michael Bratman while preserving a non-authoritative, non-operational, non-coercive posture.

This resource may be useful for courses or research in philosophy of artificial intelligence, theoretical AI ethics, AI safety, philosophy of action, philosophy of technology, practical reasoning, and value alignment.

This will delete the comment from the database. This operation is not reversible. Are you sure you want to do it?

Thank you for reporting a broken "Go to Material" link in MERLOT to help us maintain a collection of valuable learning materials.

If you feel this material is inappropriate for the MERLOT Collection, please click SEND REPORT, and the MERLOT Team will investigate. Thank you!

You are being taken to the material on another site. This will open a new window.

Do not show me this again