Robot rights? Towards a social-relational justification of moral consideration

Ethics and Information Technology 12 (3):209-221 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Should we grant rights to artificially intelligent robots? Most current and near-future robots do not meet the hard criteria set by deontological and utilitarian theory. Virtue ethics can avoid this problem with its indirect approach. However, both direct and indirect arguments for moral consideration rest on ontological features of entities, an approach which incurs several problems. In response to these difficulties, this paper taps into a different conceptual resource in order to be able to grant some degree of moral consideration to some intelligent social robots: it sketches a novel argument for moral consideration based on social relations. It is shown that to further develop this argument we need to revise our existing ontological and social-political frameworks. It is suggested that we need a social ecology, which may be developed by engaging with Western ecology and Eastern worldviews. Although this relational turn raises many difficult issues and requires more work, this paper provides a rough outline of an alternative approach to moral consideration that can assist us in shaping our relations to intelligent robots and, by extension, to all artificial and biological entities that appear to us as more than instruments for our human purposes

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,122

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Can we trust robots?Mark Coeckelbergh - 2012 - Ethics and Information Technology 14 (1):53-60.
Moral appearances: emotions, robots, and human morality. [REVIEW]Mark Coeckelbergh - 2010 - Ethics and Information Technology 12 (3):235-241.
On the moral responsibility of military robots.Thomas Hellström - 2013 - Ethics and Information Technology 15 (2):99-107.
There is no 'I' in 'Robot': Robots and Utilitarianism (expanded & revised).Christopher Grau - 2011 - In Susan Anderson & Michael Anderson (eds.), Machine Ethics. Cambridge University Press. pp. 451.
Communicative Ethics and Moral Considerability.Richard J. Evanoff - 2007 - Environmental Ethics 29 (3):247-266.
Relationalism through Social Robotics.Raya A. Jones - 2013 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 43 (4):405-424.
AI armageddon and the three laws of robotics.Lee McCauley - 2007 - Ethics and Information Technology 9 (2):153-164.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-21

Downloads
382 (#49,468)

6 months
150 (#19,366)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark Coeckelbergh
University of Vienna

Citations of this work

The other question: can and should robots have rights?David J. Gunkel - 2018 - Ethics and Information Technology 20 (2):87-99.
The Prospects of Artificial Consciousness: Ethical Dimensions and Concerns.Elisabeth Hildt - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 14 (2):58-71.
Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics.Vincent C. Müller - 2012 - In Peter Adamson (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. pp. 1-70.
Will intelligent machines become moral patients?Parisa Moosavi - forthcoming - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

View all 89 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

After virtue: a study in moral theory.Alasdair C. MacIntyre - 1981 - Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press.
Groundwork for the metaphysics of morals.Immanuel Kant - 1785 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Thomas E. Hill & Arnulf Zweig.
Sources of the self: the making of the modern identity.Charles Taylor - 1989 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to the Actor-Network Theory.Bruno Latour - 2005 - Oxford, England and New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.

View all 69 references / Add more references