【摘要】 受模型特征影响，人工智能在推动广泛领域数字转型的同时也带来了一系列伴生问题。在此基础上，人工智能的迭代范式与产业路径可能超越社会预期，与现有技术伦理和善治期待形成错位。这一过程中，人本主义的价值意涵正在人类与人工智能的结构性对峙关系中得到更新，映射人工智能时代人类持续流变的内生需求与价值期待。在治理、地理、技理、伦理、法理等维度，人工智能的研发与应用正在折射当下不同社会价值的激烈碰撞，进而形成日趋复杂的价值困境和治理难题。为维护相应领域的技术安全与良性发展，在不同价值维度均应抱持人本主义的基本立场，充分辨明现阶段人工智能治理中的矛盾冲突，以“民主动态”的前瞻性方案破解技术治理困局，运用以人为本的复合型框架实现长效技术规制。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the era of large language models(LLMs), the relentless advancement of intelligence and generalization capabilities of artificial intelligence(AI) models is catalyzing the emergence of a brand-new type of intelligent entity, thereby establishing a species-level antagonism with human collectives. In this context, the philosophical theory of humanism has been endowed with richer theoretical connotations, reflecting the dynamics of the intrinsic needs and value aspirations of the human society. AI models are characterized by emergent properties, enabling the transference of model performance across diverse societal domains and stimulating extensive digital transformation. Concurrently, the proactive deployment of AI generates a spectrum of ancillary challenges, leading to a disjunction between existing social expectations and governance anticipations.This paper endeavors to interrogate the logical dilemmas inherent in the governance of AI from the viewpoint of social values, exploring the capacity of humanism to elucidate the tensions arising from disparate societal values within the framework of technological governance. Overall, the governance of AI not only grapples with an imbalance between technological advancement and technological security but also confronts the contradictions between the demand for proactive governance and the unpredictability of AI technology. Consequently, there is an imperative to conduct reliable predictions of technological trajectories to facilitate a harmonious synthesis of technological development and security. Moreover, the establishment of a composite governance framework for AI rooted in humanistic principles is also essential. Specifically, the value-related dilemmas and governance challenges posed by AI can be systematically categorized into four dimensions: geographical, technical, ethical, and legal. By engaging humanistic theory to dissect the value conflicts pertinent to these dimensions, the conceptual foundations and implications in contemporary humanistic discourse can be further enriched and lead to the theories of “digital humanism”.To be specific, firstly, at the geographical level, the intensifying competition in AI technology among regions has unveiled intrinsic incompatibilities in the governance strategies employed by various stakeholders, thereby creating a discordant relationship with the imperatives for collaborative and integrated AI governance framework. In this light, it is important to advocate for the principle of inclusive and reciprocity to foster cross-regional cooperation in AI research and application, which is able to further facilitate the establishment of a cohesive international governance framework. Secondly, at the technical level, the pronounced incomprehensibility and uncontrollability associated with AI present fundamental challenges to effective AI governance. It is imperative to uphold the humanistic tenet of “technology for good”, thereby enhancing the explainability and controllability of AI models through the deployment of sound governance mechanisms and technological interventions. Thirdly, at the ethical level, the risks posed by multifaceted biases in AI may lead to significant algorithmic discrimination, undermining foundational values such as social equity and justice. Moreover, the advancements in AI models’ sophistication and realism could engender novel human-machine relationships that disrupt existing ethical paradigms. Consequently, the governance of AI ethics should emphasize a human-centered framework to ensure that AI prioritizes human welfare. Finally, at the legal dimension, the continuous evolution of social values in the digital age engenders tensions with the requisite stability of the legal systems. The potential catastrophic risks associated with AI may also transcend the governance capacities of the existing legal frameworks. To mitigate these challenges, it is vital to enhance the adaptability of the legal system through “democratic dynamism” and to expand the applicability and regulatory potency of the legal framework to achieve effective AI governance.更多还原