At the current stage of development, what we call “new intelligences” do not possess legal judgment.
They can produce outputs.
They can organize information.
They can simulate reasoning.
But they cannot assume responsibility.
This leads to a fundamental principle:
Responsibility cannot be delegated to a system that cannot bear it.
Under what I call the principle of reattachment,
any decision produced through such a system remains legally attached to the
human who chose to rely on it.
If a system is used beyond its legitimate function,
the one who deploys it assumes full responsibility for the consequences.
The difficulty increases when decisions result from the interaction of
multiple systems.
In such cases, responsibility does not disappear — it fragments.
It must then be reconstructed by identifying:
– the design of each component
– the quality of the data
– the conditions of integration
– and above all, the final act of deployment
Because systems do not reach the market by themselves.
Someone assembles them.
Someone validates them.
Someone offers them.
And that is where responsibility ultimately reattaches.
Not to the system,
but to the one who made it operative.
This reflection is part of a broader doctrinal work on intelligence and
responsibility in the age of AI:
→ What is intelligence?
→ Why it may not belong to anyone
→ What changes when decisions emerge from systems
Full series available here in 3 languages:
“Intelligence
Without Owner — Full Series”
https://journal-metaphysique.blogspot.com/
Systems do not decide.
They execute structures we designed.
Responsibility never disappears.
It only hides.
