What makes us still Human?

In an increasingly de-humanised world we will delve into the intriguing question of what defines reasonableness in different forms of intelligence. How do we differentiate between the rationality of humans, often considered a reasonable primate, and that of an artificial intelligence, perceived as a reasonable being?
Some Key Points of Discussion:

• Defining Reasonableness: Perspectives from Philosophy and Cognitive Science.
• Comparative Analysis: Human Rationality vs. AI Decision-Making Processes.
• Ethical Implications: Agency, Responsibility, and Moral Reasoning.
• Consciousness and Self-Awareness: Can AI achieve a comparable state to humans?
• Prospects: Implications for Society, Technology, and Ethics.

10 Questions to discuss:

1. What does it mean to be a “reasonable being”? Is reason purely logical, or does it involve emotions, intuition, or cultural context?
2. In what ways is human reasoning constrained by biological evolution?
3. Can an AI truly be called “reasonable” if it lacks subjective experience or consciousness? Why or why not?
4. AI is proven to be produce better and more reliable medical diagnosis so is there a fundamental flaw with a human making a reasonable decision?
5. Should AI reasoning be held to the same ethical standards as human reasoning, or do they require distinct frameworks for moral responsibility?
6. Can AI be considered “biased” in the same way that humans are, or is AI bias fundamentally different in origin and effect?
7. To what extent does creativity play a role in being a reasonable being—and can AI exhibit true creativity in reasoning?
8. If an AI consistently produces better or more “reasonable” decisions than humans in certain areas, does that challenge our definition of human superiority in reasoning?
9. Could the development of highly reasonable AIs lead to a redefinition of what it means to be human?
10. Should we aim to make AI reasoning more “human-like,” or should we preserve its differences to complement human thinking?