Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy

Chunlei Sun

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy

Chunlei Sun^*

Published in International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 8, Issue 4)

Received: 3 October 2025 Accepted: 13 October 2025 Published: 30 October 2025

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Digital information technologies represented by General Artificial Intelligence (GAI) are becoming the core driving force behind profound transformations in the digital judicial field. GAI may trigger ethical risks across cognitive, subject, knowledge, and data dimensions, including dissemination of biases and discrimination, privacy breaches, fabrication of false information, manipulation of cognition, and even research ethics violations. The root causes of technological ethics issues stem from insufficient stakeholder accountability, imbalance between instrumental and value rationality, self-limitation of digital judicial technologies, and inadequate AI regulatory mechanisms. It is essential to follow practical mechanisms involving technology mediation, digital benevolence, legal supervision, and ethical standard formulation. This approach aims to enhance GAIs role in reinforcing the value concept of "promoting human welfare," improving ethical governance, increasing technical explainability, strengthening corporate self-discipline, and establishing global collaborative mechanisms for comprehensive risk management. GAI undergoes rapid innovation iterations, it continues to empower human society across multiple domains: serving as an essential driving force for innovation and efficiency enhancement in the digital age, while simultaneously raising public ethical concerns due to its inherent uncertainties, risks, and complex disruptive social impacts. Assessing and addressing GAIs ethical risks proves crucial for protecting individual rights, upholding fairness and justice, and promoting social harmony. Therefore, we should approach GAI technological progress with a cautious yet forward-looking ethical perspective, ensuring that GAI truly creates benefits for humanity.

Published in	International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 8, Issue 4)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
Page(s)	261-290
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Generative Artificial Intelligence, Ethical Risks, Technology for Good, Governance of Technology Ethics, GAI Enhancing Human Well-Being

References

[1]	SEARLE JR. Minds, Brains, and Programs [J]. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1980(3) 417-457.
[2]	Li Baiyang, Bai Yun, Zhan Xini, et al. Technical Characteristics and Evolution of Artificial Intelligence Generated Content (AIGC) [J]. Library & Information Science, 2023(1): 66-74.
[3]	RIOS-CAMPOS C, LUZURIAGA VITERI J D C, PALMA BATALLA E A, et al. Generative artificial intelligence [J]. South Florida journal of development, 2023, 4(6): 2305-2320.
[4]	Qin Tianhong. Global Forum Discusses AI Governance Framework [N]. Economic Information Daily, 2024-02-07 (4).
[5]	Meng Lingxiao. Generative Artificial Intelligence Triggers "Three Transformations" in the Computing Power Industry [N]. China Science News, 2023-12-13 (3).
[6]	Henry Kissinger, Eric Schmidt, Daniel Huttenlohr. The Age of Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity [M]. Huli Ping and Feng Jun, Translators. Beijing: CITIC Publishing Group, 2023: 19-20.
[7]	GOERTZEL B, PENNACHIN C. The Novamente Artificial Intelli- gence Engine [M] //Artificial General Intelligence (Cognitive Technologies). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007.
[8]	Xiao Yanghua. Generative Language Models and General Artificial Intelligence: Connotation, Path and Inspiration [J]. Peoples Forum Academic Frontier, 2023(14) 49-57.
[9]	Li Xueyao. The Legal Nature of Artificial Intelligence Ethics [J]. Chinese and Foreign Law, 2024, 36(4): 884-898.
[10]	Bian Chun. Generative AI shows tremendous potential! McKinsey: Could contribute equivalent to one UK economy annually to global GDP [EB/OL]. Cailian Press, June 14, 2023 (October 2, 2024). https://www.clss.cn/detail/1378266
[11]	Xue Tao. UN General Assembly passes first global resolution on artificial intelligence [EB/OL]. Xinhua News Agency, (2024-03-22) [2024-10-02]. http://www.news.cn/20240322/b87aab54aeca45b6adf574eea56851c2/c.html
[12]	Sun Ninghui. Lecture 10 of the Special Lecture Series of the 14th NPC Standing Committee on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and Intelligent Computing [EB/OL]. China NPC Network, (2024-04-30) [2024-10-02]. http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c2/c30834/202404/t20240430_436915.html
[13]	THOMSEN K. The Ouroboros Model, Proposal for Self-Organizing General Cognition Substantiated [J]. AI, 2021(1): 89-105.
[14]	Bi Wenxuan. The Risk Regulation Dilemma and Resolution of Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Perspective on the Regulation of ChatGPT [J]. Comparative Law Research, 2023(3): 155-172.
[15]	Zhang Linghan. Legal Positioning and Hierarchical Governance of Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. Modern Law, 2023, 45(4): 126-141.
[16]	Chen Bing. Legal Basis for the Trustworthy Development of Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. Journal of Shanghai University of Political Science and Law (Legal Theory Series), 2023, 38(4): 13-27.
[17]	Liu Wenjie. Why Transparency and How Transparency: The Construction of Transparency Rules in Artificial Intelligence Law [J]. Comparative Law Research, 2024(2): 120-134.
[18]	Feng Zixuan. Ethical Position and Governance of Generative Artificial Intelligence Applications: A Case Study of ChatGPT. Journal of East China University of Political Science and Law, 2024, 27(1): 61-71.
[19]	Guo Xiaodong. Risks of Generative Artificial Intelligence and Its Inclusive Legal Governance [J]. Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 25(6): 93-105.
[20]	See Michael Kan. Hacker Deepfakes Employee’s Voice in Phone Call to Breach IT Company [EB/OL]. (2023-09-15) [2024-10-16]. https://www.pcmag.com/news/hacker-deepfakes-employees-voice-in-phone-call-to-breach-it-company
[21]	See Brandon Vigliarolo If you give Copilot the reins, don’t be surprised when it spills your secrets [EB/OL]. (2024-08-08) [2024-10-16]. https://www.Theregister.com/2024/08/08/copilot_black_hat_vulns/
[22]	Cai Lin. Logical Justification and Construction Approach of Legal Ethics for Algorithmic Technology [J]. Journal of Legal Science (Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law), 2024, 42(4): 92-104.
[23]	Yan Kunru. Interpreting Artificial Intelligence: Origins, Approaches, and Practices [J]. Exploration and Controversy, 2022(8): 102-109, 178.
[24]	CHALMERS D J. The Conscious Mind: in Search of a Theory of Conscious Experience [M]. New York: OxfordUniversity Press, 1996.
[25]	Mitchell Landman. Philosophy of Anthropology [M]. Yan Jia, translator. Guiyang: Guizhou Peoples Publishing House, 2006.
[26]	Jiang Penghui. Research on the Neurophilosophy of Brain and Cognition [D]. Taiyuan: Shanxi University, 2023.
[27]	Li Jianhui. The Formalization of the Mind and Its Challenges: Philosophy of Cognitive Science [J]. China Philosophy Yearbook, 2018(1): 365-366.
[28]	Roger Penrose. New Brain of Emperor: About Computer, Human Brain and Physical Laws [M]. Xu Mingxian and Wu Zhongchao, Translators. Changsha: Hunan Science and Technology Press, 2007.
[29]	Qasem F. ChatGPT in scientific and academic research: future fears and reassurances [J]. Library Hi Tech News, 2023, 40(3): 30-32.
[30]	George A S, George A S H, Baskar T, etal. The Allure of Artificial Intimacy: Examining the Appeal and Ethics of Using Generative AI for Simulated Relationships [J]. Partners Universal International Innovation Journal, 2023, 1(6): 132-147.
[31]	Zhang Yongxue. From Automation Technology to Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Study on Skill Heterogeneity in the Impact of Technology on Workers [J]. Sociology Research, 2024, 39(4): 69-91.
[32]	Compiled by the Marx Engels Lenin Stalin Works Compilation Bureau of the CPC Central Committee. Marx and Engels Collected Works (Volume 1) [M]. Beijing: Peoples Publishing House, 2009: 501.
[33]	Compiled by the Marx Engels Lenin Stalin Works Compilation Bureau of the CPC Central Committee. Marx and Engels Collected Works (Volume 1) [M]. Beijing: Peoples Publishing House, 2009: 159.
[34]	Compiled by the Marx Engels Lenin Stalin Works Compilation Bureau of the CPC Central Committee. Marx Engels Collection (Volume 1) [M]. Beijing: Peoples Publishing House, 2009: 157.
[35]	Bao Jin, Huang Jing. Marxist Examination of the Human-Machine Relationship in the Intelligent Era [J]. Ideological and Theoretical Education, 2023(11): 85-91.
[36]	Cheng Le. The Current Status, Challenges and Prospects of Generative AI Governance [J]. Peoples Tribune, 2024(2): 76-81.
[37]	Xing Can. The launch of the Wen Sheng video model Sora brings both transformation and risks [N]. China City News, 2024-02-26 (4).
[38]	Representatives of the 27 EU countries unanimously supported the text of the AI Bill [EB/OL] (2024-02-03) [2024-05-08]. https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1789848941640499406&wfr=spider&for=pc
[39]	Zhang Ting. Ethics and Risk Governance of Artificial Intelligence: An Analysis [J]. Zhongzhou Academic Journal, 2022(1): 114-118.
[40]	Luo Huijun, Zha Yunlong. Global Governance Transformation in the Era of Artificial Intelligence and Chinas Response [J]. Journal of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2023(12): 13-24.
[41]	Yan Kunru. The Evolution of Research on Technological Risks and Analysis of Its Development Trends [J]. Academic Research, 2017(2): 26-32.
[42]	Meng Tianguang and Li Zhenzhen. Governance Algorithm: Ethical Principles of Algorithmic Risks and Their Governance Logic [J]. Academic Forum, 2022(1): 9-20.
[43]	Zhi Zhenfeng. Information Content Governance of Generative Artificial Intelligence Large Models [J]. Political and Legal Forum, 2023, 41(4): 34-48.
[44]	Warmling D L, Bastone P. Freud e o descentramento da subjetividade: o inconsciente como via de recusa consciencialista [J]. Griot: Revista de Filosofia, 2023, 23(2): 79-98.
[45]	Singh O P. Artificial Intelligence and Psychoanalysis: A New Concept of Research Methodology [J] NPRC Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2024, 1(1): 19-27.
[46]	Bontcheva K, Papadopoulous S, Tsalakanidou F, et al. Generative AI and disinformation: recent advances, challenges, and opportunities [J]. 2024.
[47]	Dai Jinping, Tan Yangyang, Ideological Risks and Countermeasures of ChatGPT and Other Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. Journal of Chongqing University (Social Sciences Edition), 2023, 29(5): 101-110.
[48]	Gao Lianghua: "Out of Control Technology and Human Responsibility: On the Frankenstein Problem", Science and Society, No. 3, 2016.
[49]	[French] Bernard Stiegler: "Technology and Time: The Fault of Epiemus", translated by Pei Cheng, Nanjing: Yilin Press, 2019, pp. 203-209.
[50]	Hu Jianmiao Expert Studio. Generative AI Governance Urges Legislative Follow-up [N]. Learning Times, 2024-03-13 (A3).
[51]	Xiaodong Xie. Risk and Control: On the Protection of Personal Information in the Application of Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. Political and Legal Essays, 2023(4): 59-68.
[52]	[German] Amine Gruenwald, ed., Handbook of Technology Ethics, translated by Wu Yu, Beijing: Social Sciences Literature Press, 2017, pp. 67-68.
[53]	Duan Weiwen. Accurate Assessment of the Social and Ethical Risks of Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. China Party and Government Cadres Forum, 2023(4): 76-77.
[54]	Bai Junyi and Yu Wei: "The Limitations of Educational Artificial Intelligence Ethics Principles and Their Rectification-Including a Discussion on the Principle-Deed-Law Framework", China Electro-Education, No. 2, 2024.
[55]	BUBECKS, CHANDRASEKARANV, ELDANR, et al. Sparks of Artificial General Intelligence: Early Experiments with GPT-4 [EB/OL]. (2023-03-22) [2025-02-21]. https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.12712
[56]	HANSSON S O. Risk and safety in technology [M]// MEIJERS A. Handbook of the philosophy of science, philosophy of technology and engineering sciences, Oxford: Elsevier, 2009: 1069-1102.
[57]	Zhao Zhiyun, Xu Feng, Gao Fang, et al. Several understandings on the ethical risks of artificial intelligence [J]. China Soft Science, 2021(6): 1-12.
[58]	Frangois Candelon, Lisa Krayer, Saran Rajendran, et al., “How People Can Create — and Destroy — Value with Generative AI”, BCG Henderson Institute Website https://www.bcg.com/publications/2023/how-people-create-anddestroy-value-with-gen-ai (Oct. 3, 2024).
[59]	Chen Yongwei. "Beyond ChatGPT: Opportunities, Risks and Challenges of Generative AI" [J]. Journal of Shandong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2023(3): 127-143.
[60]	Wang Xiaodong: Critique of Intersubjectivity Theory in Western Philosophy, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2004, p. 22.
[61]	Wu Qiantao, Xu Baicai et al., Theory and Practice of Ideological and Political Education in Colleges and Universities, Beijing: Peoples Publishing House, 2012, p. 30.
[62]	FLORIDI L, SANDERS J W. On the Morality of Artificial Agents [J]. Minds and Machines, 2004(3): 349-379.
[63]	Jia Luman, Chen Fan. The reconstruction of moral subject under technical mediation [J]. Research on Dialectics of Nature, 2018(6): 39-43.
[64]	COECKELLBERGH M. David J. Gunkel: The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics [J]. Ethics and Information Technology, 2013(3): 235-238.
[65]	Zhang Lu. Risk Governance and Supervision of General Artificial Intelligence: Issues and Challenges Triggered by ChatGPT. E-Government, 2023(9): 14-24.
[66]	Ye Ying, Zhu Xiuzhu et al., From the Outbreak of ChatGPT to the Enlightenment of GPT Technology Revolution, Intelligence Theory and Practice, No. 6, 2023.
[67]	Wang Shaoshao. The Obstacles of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Academic Misconduct Governance and Countermeasures [J]. Science Studies, 2024(7): 1361-1368.
[68]	Xu Lan, Wei Qingyi, and Yan Yi. Strategies and Principles for the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education from an Academic Ethics Perspective [J]. Educational Development Research, 2023(19): 49-60.
[69]	Chen Changfeng and Huang Yangkun: The Knowledge Function of ChatGPT and the Crisis of Human Knowledge, Modern Publishing, No. 6, 2023.
[70]	Jonathan J. Tennant, “Web of Science and Scopus Are Not Global Databases of Knowledge”, European Science Editing, no. 46, 2020.
[71]	"Tracking of Student Information Leakage Incident in Study Connect; Some Sellers Sold Overnight, Claiming to Have Been Bought Out by Major Investors", China News Network: https://www.chinanews.com.cn/cj/2022/06-23/9786718.shtml (September 25, 2024).
[72]	Qu Haowei and Li Junshu: On the Legal Protection of Data Security for Virtual Digital Human Applications--Taking the Implementation of Generative Artificial Intelligence as the Approach, Electronic Intellectual Property, 2024, No. 7.
[73]	Xiao Dong Xie. Data Security Risks and Adaptive Governance in Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. Dongfang Methodology, 2023(5): 106-116.
[74]	FARINAM, YUX, LAVAZZAA. Ethical considerations and policy interventions concerning the impact of generative AI tools in th e econom y an d i n societ y [J] AI and ethics, 2025, 5: 737- 745.
[75]	Feng Jianjun. Citizen Subjectivity and Its Cultivation [J]. Educational Science, 2020, 36(6): 1-6.
[76]	MATTHIAS A. The Responsibility Gap: Ascribing Responsibility for the Actions of Learning Automata [J]. Ethics and Information Technology, 2004(3): 175-183.
[77]	LEBEN D. A Rawlsian Algorithm for Autonomous Vehicles [J]. Ethics and Information Technology, 2017(2): 107-115.
[78]	Guo Jing. Responsibility attribution based on human-machine cooperative action [J]. Studies on dialectics of nature, 2020(11): 54-60.
[79]	Xie Yu, Wang Xiaoyi. Ethical Risks of Artificial Intelligence Emotion and Its Response [J]. Ethics Research, 2024(1): 132-140.
[80]	See Louis et al. V. Safe Rent et al. (D. Mass), Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice. [2024-11-03]. https://www.Justice.gov/crt/case/louis-et-al-v-saferent-et-al-d-mass
[81]	Xu Yongchun. United Nations Report: Generative AI Exacerbates Gender Bias [N]. Xinhua Daily Telegraph, 2024-03-09 (012).
[82]	Buchanan B, Lohn A, Musser M, et al. Truth, lies, and automation [J]. Center for Security and Emerging technology, 202 1, 1(1): 2.
[83]	Kreps S, Kriner D. How AI threatens democracy [J]. Journal of Democracy, 2023, 34(4): 122-131.
[84]	Zhao Juecheng, a heavy-duty task ahead! U.S. military moves: Accelerating tech partnerships with American tech giants to militarize generative AI [EB/OL]. Global Times, January 30, 2024 [November 16, 2024]. https://world.huanqiu.com/article/4GNTglNUyew?re=nextnews
[85]	OPC launches investigation into ChatGPT, OPC. (2023-04-04) [2024-11-06]. https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/opc-news/news-and-announcements/2023/an_230404/
[86]	Philip N. Yannella, Timothy W. Dickens. OpenAI Class Action Likely to Increase Scrutiny of Webscraping and Data Collection Practices [EB/OL]. (2023-07-06) [2024-11-09]. https://www.ballardspahr.com/insights/alerts-and-articles/2023/07/openai-class-action-likely-to-increase-scrutiny-on-webscraping
[87]	Wang Qinghua, Hu Lintian. The Technical and Legal Construction of the Responsibility Mechanism for Generative Artificial Intelligence [J]. China Law Review, 2024(4): 114-130.
[88]	Wach K, Duong C D, Ejdys J, et al. The dark side of generative artificial intelligence: A critical analysis of controversies and risks of ChatGPT [J]. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 2023, 11(2): 7-30.
[89]	Frances D’Emilio, Matt O’Brien. Italy temporarily blocks ChatGPT over privacy concerns [EB/OL]. (2023-03-31) [2024-11-10]. https://www.Pbs.org/newshour/science/italy-temporarily-blocks-chatgpt-over-privacy-concerns
[90]	ChatGPT fined $ 2,829 for exposing personal info of 687 Korean users [EB/OL]. (2023 -07-27) [2024-11-10]. https://www.koreatimes.co.kr / business/companies /20230727 /chatgpt-fined-2829-for-exposing-personal-info-of-687-korean-users
[91]	Li Yan. High Attention to the "Intelligence Gap" in the AI Era [EB/OL]. Global Times, (2023-04-21) [2024-11-12]. https://opinion.huanqiu.com/ article /4CZgHgDqRno
[92]	See Eric Revell. Microsoft tells European regulators Google has an edge in generative AI [EB / OL]. (2024-03-17) [2024-11-13]. https://www.Foxbusiness.com/technology/microsoft-tells-european-regulators-google-has-edge-generative-ai
[93]	Staff in the Bureau of Competition & Office of Technology. Generative AI Raises Competition Concerns [EB/OL]. (2023-06-29) [2024-11-16]. https://www.Ftc.gov/policy/advocacy-research/tech-at-ftc/2023/06/generative-ai-raises-competition-concerns
[94]	[German] Ulrich Beck: Risk Society--A New Road to Modernization, translated by Zhang Wenjie et al., Nanjing: Yilin Press, 2020, p. 24.
[95]	Wu Guosheng. Classics of Philosophy of Technology [M]. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2022: 6.
[96]	Jia Luman and Chen Fan: "Research on the Reconstruction of Moral Subjects under Technical Mediation", Dialectics of Nature Research, No. 6, 2018.
[97]	Li Mang and Yu Luyao: "The Enlightenment of Learning from the Past to the Digitization of Education", Electric Education Research, No. 4, 2024.
[98]	Zhang Hongzheng: The Inevitability and Controllability of Technological Alienation from the Perspective of the Duality of Technology, Science, Technology and Dialectics, No. 5, 2005.
[99]	Qiao Ruijin, Mou Huan Sen et al., Introduction to Philosophy of Technology, Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2009, p. 153.
[100]	Liu Jinrui. New Risks and Regulatory Framework for Generative AI Large Models [J]. Research on Administrative Law, 2024(2): 17-32.
[101]	Miao Fengchun, Holmes Wayne, Huang Ronghuai, et al., “AI and Education: Guidance for Policy-Makers”, https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000376709 (Sep. 23, 2024).
[102]	See Japans Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. "Utilization of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Elementary and Secondary Education (Ver.2.0) (Published on December 26, Reiwa 6 [EB/OL]. [2024-11-16]. https://www.mext.org/Go.jp/a_menu/other/mext_02412.html
[103]	Chen Weixing, The Epistemological Challenge of Intelligent Communication, International Journal of Journalism, No. 9, 2021.
[104]	[Alexander of Greece] Nicomachean Ethics, translated by Deng Anqing, Beijing: Peoples Publishing House, 2010, p. 38.
[105]	Chen Fan and Li Jiawei. Technology as the Other: New Considerations on the Ethical Relationship between Humans and Technology [J]. Journal of Wuhan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2022, 75(6): 50-59.
[106]	Cheng Le. Regulatory Appraisal of General Artificial Intelligence under the Perspective of "Digital Humanism" [J]. Political and Legal Essays, 2024(3): 3-20.
[107]	Chen Yingda, Wang Wei. From "Urgent Use First" to "Gradual Improvement": The Construction of Generative Artificial Intelligence Governance System [J]. E-government, 2024(4): 113-124.
[108]	Cheng Le. The Situation, Challenges and Prospects of Generative Artificial Intelligence Governance [J]. Peoples Forum, 2024(2): 76-81.
[109]	Zhang Linghan. What Kind of AI Law Does China Need? — The Basic Logic and Institutional Framework of Chinas AI Legislation [J]. Legal Science (Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law), 2024, 42(3): 3-17.
[110]	Carlos Moreira and David Ferguson. The Code of the Superhuman [M]. Zhang Yi (Translated). Beijing: CITIC Publishing Group, 2021: 4.
[111]	Carlos Moreira and David Ferguson. The Code of the Superhuman [M]. Zhang Yi, translator. Beijing: CITIC Publishing Group, 2021: 10.
[112]	The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of the Peoples Republic of China. Interim Measures for the Administration of Generative Artificial Intelligence Services [EB/OL] (2023-08-30) (2024-12-02). https://<1>.cn/gyhxxhb/jgsj/cyzcyfgs/bmgz/xxtxl/art/2023/art_4248f433b62143d8a0222a7db8873822.html
[113]	KENTHAPADIK, LAKKARAJUH, RAJANIN. Generative AI meets responsible AI: practical challenges and opportunities [C] // Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 2023: 5805-5806.
[114]	Notice on the Issuance of the Measures for the Review of Scientific and Technological Ethics (Trial) [EB/OL] (2023-09-07) (2024-12-02). https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/2023/issue_10826/202311/content_6915814.html
[115]	Cao Jianfeng. The Pathways and Implications of AI Ethics and Governance in the EU [J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2019(4): 39-47.
[116]	Xue Lan. How to Build a Balanced and Inclusive AI Governance System [EB/OL] (2021-12-11) [2024-03-17]. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/vAdOea-IX-3aBQOosKPXiQ]
[117]	Global Forum on Artificial Intelligence Governance Framework [EB/OL]. (February 7, 2024) [December 20, 2024]. https://tech.huanqiu.com/article/4GUG3d5zcFm

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Sun, C. (2025). Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy. International Journal of Law and Society, 8(4), 261-290. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Sun, C. Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy. Int. J. Law Soc. 2025, 8(4), 261-290. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Sun C. Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy. Int J Law Soc. 2025;8(4):261-290. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11,
  author = {Chunlei Sun},
  title = {Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy
},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {8},
  number = {4},
  pages = {261-290},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20250804.11},
  abstract = {Digital information technologies represented by General Artificial Intelligence (GAI) are becoming the core driving force behind profound transformations in the digital judicial field. GAI may trigger ethical risks across cognitive, subject, knowledge, and data dimensions, including dissemination of biases and discrimination, privacy breaches, fabrication of false information, manipulation of cognition, and even research ethics violations. The root causes of technological ethics issues stem from insufficient stakeholder accountability, imbalance between instrumental and value rationality, self-limitation of digital judicial technologies, and inadequate AI regulatory mechanisms. It is essential to follow practical mechanisms involving technology mediation, digital benevolence, legal supervision, and ethical standard formulation. This approach aims to enhance GAIs role in reinforcing the value concept of "promoting human welfare," improving ethical governance, increasing technical explainability, strengthening corporate self-discipline, and establishing global collaborative mechanisms for comprehensive risk management. GAI undergoes rapid innovation iterations, it continues to empower human society across multiple domains: serving as an essential driving force for innovation and efficiency enhancement in the digital age, while simultaneously raising public ethical concerns due to its inherent uncertainties, risks, and complex disruptive social impacts. Assessing and addressing GAIs ethical risks proves crucial for protecting individual rights, upholding fairness and justice, and promoting social harmony. Therefore, we should approach GAI technological progress with a cautious yet forward-looking ethical perspective, ensuring that GAI truly creates benefits for humanity.
},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy

AU  - Chunlei Sun
Y1  - 2025/10/30
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 261
EP  - 290
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
AB  - Digital information technologies represented by General Artificial Intelligence (GAI) are becoming the core driving force behind profound transformations in the digital judicial field. GAI may trigger ethical risks across cognitive, subject, knowledge, and data dimensions, including dissemination of biases and discrimination, privacy breaches, fabrication of false information, manipulation of cognition, and even research ethics violations. The root causes of technological ethics issues stem from insufficient stakeholder accountability, imbalance between instrumental and value rationality, self-limitation of digital judicial technologies, and inadequate AI regulatory mechanisms. It is essential to follow practical mechanisms involving technology mediation, digital benevolence, legal supervision, and ethical standard formulation. This approach aims to enhance GAIs role in reinforcing the value concept of "promoting human welfare," improving ethical governance, increasing technical explainability, strengthening corporate self-discipline, and establishing global collaborative mechanisms for comprehensive risk management. GAI undergoes rapid innovation iterations, it continues to empower human society across multiple domains: serving as an essential driving force for innovation and efficiency enhancement in the digital age, while simultaneously raising public ethical concerns due to its inherent uncertainties, risks, and complex disruptive social impacts. Assessing and addressing GAIs ethical risks proves crucial for protecting individual rights, upholding fairness and justice, and promoting social harmony. Therefore, we should approach GAI technological progress with a cautious yet forward-looking ethical perspective, ensuring that GAI truly creates benefits for humanity.

VL  - 8
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Chunlei Sun

School of Law, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China

Contact Email

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Sun, C. (2025). Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy. International Journal of Law and Society, 8(4), 261-290. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Sun, C. Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy. Int. J. Law Soc. 2025, 8(4), 261-290. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Sun C. Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy. Int J Law Soc. 2025;8(4):261-290. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11,
  author = {Chunlei Sun},
  title = {Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy
},
  journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
  volume = {8},
  number = {4},
  pages = {261-290},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20250804.11},
  abstract = {Digital information technologies represented by General Artificial Intelligence (GAI) are becoming the core driving force behind profound transformations in the digital judicial field. GAI may trigger ethical risks across cognitive, subject, knowledge, and data dimensions, including dissemination of biases and discrimination, privacy breaches, fabrication of false information, manipulation of cognition, and even research ethics violations. The root causes of technological ethics issues stem from insufficient stakeholder accountability, imbalance between instrumental and value rationality, self-limitation of digital judicial technologies, and inadequate AI regulatory mechanisms. It is essential to follow practical mechanisms involving technology mediation, digital benevolence, legal supervision, and ethical standard formulation. This approach aims to enhance GAIs role in reinforcing the value concept of "promoting human welfare," improving ethical governance, increasing technical explainability, strengthening corporate self-discipline, and establishing global collaborative mechanisms for comprehensive risk management. GAI undergoes rapid innovation iterations, it continues to empower human society across multiple domains: serving as an essential driving force for innovation and efficiency enhancement in the digital age, while simultaneously raising public ethical concerns due to its inherent uncertainties, risks, and complex disruptive social impacts. Assessing and addressing GAIs ethical risks proves crucial for protecting individual rights, upholding fairness and justice, and promoting social harmony. Therefore, we should approach GAI technological progress with a cautious yet forward-looking ethical perspective, ensuring that GAI truly creates benefits for humanity.
},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Generative Artificial Intelligence: Research on the Risk of Science and Technology Ethics, Regulatory Mechanism and Governance Strategy

AU  - Chunlei Sun
Y1  - 2025/10/30
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
T2  - International Journal of Law and Society
JF  - International Journal of Law and Society
JO  - International Journal of Law and Society
SP  - 261
EP  - 290
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2640-1908
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20250804.11
AB  - Digital information technologies represented by General Artificial Intelligence (GAI) are becoming the core driving force behind profound transformations in the digital judicial field. GAI may trigger ethical risks across cognitive, subject, knowledge, and data dimensions, including dissemination of biases and discrimination, privacy breaches, fabrication of false information, manipulation of cognition, and even research ethics violations. The root causes of technological ethics issues stem from insufficient stakeholder accountability, imbalance between instrumental and value rationality, self-limitation of digital judicial technologies, and inadequate AI regulatory mechanisms. It is essential to follow practical mechanisms involving technology mediation, digital benevolence, legal supervision, and ethical standard formulation. This approach aims to enhance GAIs role in reinforcing the value concept of "promoting human welfare," improving ethical governance, increasing technical explainability, strengthening corporate self-discipline, and establishing global collaborative mechanisms for comprehensive risk management. GAI undergoes rapid innovation iterations, it continues to empower human society across multiple domains: serving as an essential driving force for innovation and efficiency enhancement in the digital age, while simultaneously raising public ethical concerns due to its inherent uncertainties, risks, and complex disruptive social impacts. Assessing and addressing GAIs ethical risks proves crucial for protecting individual rights, upholding fairness and justice, and promoting social harmony. Therefore, we should approach GAI technological progress with a cautious yet forward-looking ethical perspective, ensuring that GAI truly creates benefits for humanity.

VL  - 8
IS  - 4
ER  -

Copy | Download