Know Thyself, and Apply Science Accordingly
August 2025
In 2025, as artificial intelligence evolves from theoretical marvel to everyday tool, a critical shift is emerging: the race for superintelligence is being eclipsed by the urgent need for superethics. Where superintelligence seeks to push cognitive boundaries, superethics demands we confront a more profound question: How can we harness technology without losing our humanity? Recent scandals—deepfake political manipulation, biased hiring algorithms, and autonomous vehicles making life-or-death decisions—highlight a chilling truth: intelligence without ethics accelerates harm 3 6 .
Emotional Intelligence (EI) Reexamined: A 2024 study of 231 French managers revealed two distinct EI profiles: Full Emotional Processors (FEP), who integrate empathy and ethics, and Minimal Emotional Processors (MEP), who use EI tactically. Crucially, FEP managers scored significantly lower in Machiavellian behaviors, proving that emotional skills, when rooted in self-awareness, deter manipulation 1 .
The Dark Triad Trap: Research confirms that without ethical grounding, high cognitive ability can enable narcissism and psychopathy. The "Jekyll and Hyde" duality of intelligence underscores why "Know Thyself" isn't philosophical fluff—it's a behavioral vaccine 1 7 .
Autonomous vehicles and medical AI force us to operationalize ethics. Modern variations of Philippa Foot's Trolley Problem—such as programming self-driving cars to prioritize passenger or pedestrian lives—reveal a stark gap: 83% of people demand ethical AI, but only 12% trust corporations to build it 4 6 .
| Scenario | Approval Rate | Key Concern |
|---|---|---|
| Medical AI prioritizing patients by survival odds | 34% | Justice vs. utilitarianism |
| Self-driving cars swerving to save pedestrians | 41% | Consent of passengers |
| AI judges predicting recidivism | 28% | Racial/gender bias amplification |
In a landmark 2024 study, researchers used QEPro, a performance-based emotional intelligence test, to evaluate 231 managers. Unlike self-report surveys, QEPro simulated high-stakes workplace scenarios (e.g., conflict resolution, ethical dilemmas), tracking:
Managers were then assessed for "Dark Triad" traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy) using standardized psychological inventories.
| EI Profile | Machiavellianism Score | Likelihood of Knowledge Theft | Citizenship Behaviors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full Emotional Processors (FEP) | Low (2.1/10) | 14% | High (45% above avg) |
| Minimal Emotional Processors (MEP) | High (4.3/10) | 63% | Low (24% below avg) |
Analysis: FEP managers weren't just "nicer"—they were strategically ethical. Their ability to process emotions holistically reduced manipulation by 52% compared to MEP peers. This proves EI, when tied to self-reflection, acts as an ethical immune system 1 5 .
To operationalize superethics, researchers deploy these tools:
| Tool | Function | Real-World Application |
|---|---|---|
| Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) | Identifies hidden behavioral clusters | Isolating EI profiles like FEP/MEP to predict ethical risk 1 |
| Differential Privacy Algorithms | Anonymizes data while preserving utility | Enabling bias audits in HR AI without exposing employee identities 3 |
| Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) | Enforces informed consent/harm minimization | Blocking high-risk studies (e.g., emotion manipulation) pre-emptively 5 9 |
| TruthfulQA Benchmarks | Measures AI truthfulness | Exposing GPT-4's 25% truthfulness rate, forcing accuracy fixes 3 |
Despite hype, only 6% of HR departments use AI extensively. Why? Capability gaps (poor data, biased training sets) and ethical fears (e.g., replacing humans). Solutions like LLM security tools now actively correct biases in job descriptions, but success hinges on human oversight: "Technology serves as an enabler, but true value lies in human storytelling" 6 .
Studies show 50% of employees experience idea theft, triggering information hiding and team breakdowns. Superethics counters this through:
Generative AI's top risks—deepfakes, bias, copyright ambiguity—demand superethical responses:
Norway's 2024 Research Ethics Guidelines mandate: "When risks are uncertain, prioritize caution over speed." Example: Climate AI models must now disclose uncertainty margins before guiding policy 9 .
Superintelligence alone is a dead end—as evidenced by toxic algorithms and innovation slowdowns from unchecked complexity 1 9 . Superethics, rooted in self-knowledge, offers a viable path.
Researchers now advocate for a Modern Hippocratic Oath (adapted from Norwegian guidelines):
"I vow to uphold scientific integrity, prioritize societal good over ambition, and honor the line between exploration and exploitation" 9 .
The future belongs not to the smartest, but to the wisest: those who know themselves well enough to wield science with conscience.