Martin Gibert
MontréalMeet Martin Gibert, a researcher in the ethics of artificial intelligence at the Université de Montréal...
Studies, readings, projects... Here is what he has to say!
Could you introduce yourself? What are you currently doing?
I am a researcher in the ethics of artificial intelligence at the Université de Montréal. More specifically, I am affiliated with the Centre de Recherche en Éthique (CRÉ) and the Institut de valorisation des données (IVADO). Sometimes I think I have found the dream job for a philosopher: artificial intelligence really is a goldmine of new questions and concepts to explore. So, in essence, I get paid to think about this. Well, that is not entirely true: I also have to answer emails, go to meetings, and check my Facebook notifications.
Back when Facebook (and LibGen) did not yet exist, I studied philosophy in France — in Clermont-Ferrand, Toulouse, and Paris. Having passed the CAPES, I was fortunate enough to do my national service as a volunteer teacher at the two French lycées in Montreal. I then spent a year teaching in Tunisia as a résident before taking a leave of absence from the Éducation Nationale and moving to Canada for good. It was there that I completed a PhD in moral psychology under the supervision of Christine Tappolet, a specialist in emotions and metaethics. In my thesis, I argued that imagination has an epistemic function: it enriches our moral knowledge, particularly through perspective-taking, seeing-as, and metaphor or counterfactual thinking. This became a book, L'imagination en morale (Hermann, 2014).
I then did a postdoc at McGill University — I never wanted to leave Montreal! — with a growing interest in experimental philosophy. I also used this period to apply my analyses of moral perception to the field of animal ethics. In Voir son steak comme animal mort : véganisme et psychologie morale (Lux, 2015), a book aimed more at a general readership than the previous one, I try in particular to understand why people find it so hard to boycott animal exploitation when they broadly agree on the substance: we should not unnecessarily inflict suffering or death on sentient beings.
I am also intellectually committed to the vegan/anti-speciesist movement. After serving as editor-in-chief of the short-lived Véganes magazine, I am now co-editor-in-chief of l'Amorce, revue contre le spécisme. It is a privileged vantage point from which to watch a new moral and political field taking shape in real time: anti-speciesism throws up a number of fascinating debates and problems, and the stakes are high — we are talking about the living and dying conditions of hundreds of billions of individuals.
On the teaching side, I give a course in Critical Thinking and Dialogue at the Université du Québec à Montréal. I enjoy it. It is an area that philosophy teachers should take on more: they are probably the best equipped for this kind of course. Finally, I am collaborating as co-editor of the "morality" section of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy online — a fine project that is now well under way.
What memories do you have of your studies?
I have fairly good memories of my studies in France, though I can now compare them with my experience in Canada. For instance, I think it is a shame that the agrégation syllabus — the French Championship! — so often dictates what gets taught at university. It seems to perpetuate a rather conservative approach to philosophy.
What also strikes me is how pervasive the "competition and hierarchy" dimension is at university — and at lycée, and on France Culture, pretty much everywhere, really. In North America, things seem far more horizontal. Doctoral students are treated as colleagues by other researchers. Professors do not look down on you. All in all, it is a more congenial environment.
And since I was crossing the Atlantic anyway, I decided to explore the dark side of the Force. In brief: it is better over there. Through the analytic tradition, I discovered that one could try to solve philosophical problems rigorously and systematically — a far cry from the solitary, artistic philosophers in the mould of Deleuze, who offer no arguments in support of their theses. With hindsight, I wish I had encountered analytic philosophy much earlier.
Which philosophical book have you been particularly passionate about?
I have always been more drawn to contemporary thought than to the history of philosophy. When I was younger, I read a great deal of Deleuze and loved his wit, his intelligence, and his idea-generating quality. Later, when I discovered ethics, several books by Peter Singer and Ruwen Ogien made a lasting impression. That said, on a day-to-day basis, I mostly read articles that are somewhat dry — but sound and rigorous — and embedded in fairly technical debates.
At the moment, I would say that the philosophers who interest me most tend to be from my own generation and are often involved in the anti-speciesist movement: I am thinking in particular of the animal ethics specialist Valéry Giroux, the ecofeminist Christiane Bailey, and the theorist of black veganism, Syl Ko.
What are your projects and research interests?
I am trying to keep an AI ethics blog going — The Fourth Wound. I give talks at Cégeps (the Quebec equivalent of sixth-form colleges) and collaborate on educational initiatives and research projects. At the moment, I am working on an article with a colleague on the moral status of AIs, and finishing an introductory book on the ethics of AI centred on the question of artificial moral agents. It should be out in spring 2020 in Quebec — nothing has yet been decided for France. My articles can also be found on my website.
Thank you, Martin, for sharing your story!
> Explore other philosophical journeys in the agora...