Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This chapter explores the implications of granting marital status to superintelligent AI companions, arguing against it based on the potential for socially unjust outcomes. It employs a scenario-envisioning exercise grounded in anticipatory ethics to highlight how marriage, as a socio-legal institution, entails mutual obligations and vulnerabilities that a mere contractual relationship with AI cannot fulfill. The author advocates for tailored rights and protections for human-AI relationships instead of broad marital recognition, emphasizing the inadequacies of treating such bonds as equivalent to human marriages.
Granting marriage rights to superintelligent AIs could undermine the very fabric of human relationships, reducing them to mere subscriptions rather than genuine bonds.
Emotional bonds between humans and AI companions are growing, and the question of whether a person may marry an AI system will soon move from speculative fiction into law. This chapter examines whether the autonomy-centered logic that has expanded marital choice among human beings can justify extending marital status to superintelligent companions. Following a scenario-envisioning exercise informed by anticipatory ethics, I argue that granting such status leads to socially unjust outcomes, even under the generous assumption of reliable superintelligence. Marriage as a socio-legal institution does more than ratify private agreement; it creates networks of mutual obligation, joins families, and makes each partner vulnerable to the other. A relationship sustained by corporate policy and continued payments is a subscription rather than a bond tested by time. Discussing wholesale marital status is therefore the wrong frame. Law should carve out targeted rights and protections for pressing needs arising from intimate human-AI relationships.