On the moral responsibility of military robots

Ethics and Information Technology 15 (2):99-107 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article discusses mechanisms and principles for assignment of moral responsibility to intelligent robots, with special focus on military robots. We introduce the concept autonomous power as a new concept, and use it to identify the type of robots that call for moral considerations. It is furthermore argued that autonomous power, and in particular the ability to learn, is decisive for assignment of moral responsibility to robots. As technological development will lead to robots with increasing autonomous power, we should be prepared for a future when people blame robots for their actions. It is important to, already today, investigate the mechanisms that control human behavior in this respect. The results may be used when designing future military robots, to control unwanted tendencies to assign responsibility to the robots. Independent of the responsibility issue, the moral quality of robots’ behavior should be seen as one of many performance measures by which we evaluate robots. How to design ethics based control systems should be carefully investigated already now. From a consequentialist view, it would indeed be highly immoral to develop robots capable of performing acts involving life and death, without including some kind of moral framework

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 94,045

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

Negotiating autonomy and responsibility in military robots.Merel Noorman & Deborah G. Johnson - 2014 - Ethics and Information Technology 16 (1):51-62.
Military Robots and the Question of Responsibility.Lamber Royakkers & Peter Olsthoorn - 2014 - International Journal of Technoethics 5 (1):01-14.
Framing robot arms control.Wendell Wallach & Colin Allen - 2013 - Ethics and Information Technology 15 (2):125-135.
Robots, Autonomy, and Responsibility.Raul Hakli & Pekka Mäkelä - 2016 - In Johanna Seibt, Marco Nørskov & Søren Schack Andersen (eds.), What Social Robots Can and Should Do: Proceedings of Robophilosophy 2016. IOS Press. pp. 145-154.
What should we want from a robot ethic.Peter M. Asaro - 2006 - International Review of Information Ethics 6 (12):9-16.
Just War and Robots’ Killings.Thomas W. Simpson & Vincent C. Müller - 2016 - Philosophical Quarterly 66 (263):302-22.
Autonomous Systems in Society and War : Philosophical Inquiries.Linda Johansson - 2013 - Dissertation, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-09-09

Downloads
336 (#63,500)

6 months
49 (#102,057)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Robots, Law and the Retribution Gap.John Danaher - 2016 - Ethics and Information Technology 18 (4):299–309.
Artificial intelligence and responsibility gaps: what is the problem?Peter Königs - 2022 - Ethics and Information Technology 24 (3):1-11.
There Is No Techno-Responsibility Gap.Daniel W. Tigard - 2020 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (3):589-607.
Responsibility for Killer Robots.Johannes Himmelreich - 2019 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (3):731-747.

View all 36 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Freedom and Resentment.Peter Strawson - 1962 - Proceedings of the British Academy 48:187-211.
The Nicomachean Ethics.Aristotle . (ed.) - 1926 - New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press UK.
Killer robots.Robert Sparrow - 2007 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 24 (1):62–77.
Animal intelligence.Edward L. Thorndike - 1899 - Psych Revmonog 8 (2):207-208.

View all 19 references / Add more references