Why Indirect Harms do not Support Social Robot Rights
Minds and Machines 32 (4):735-749 (2022)
Abstract
There is growing evidence to support the claim that we react differently to robots than we do to other objects. In particular, we react differently to robots with which we have some form of social interaction. In this paper I critically assess the claim that, due to our tendency to become emotionally attached to social robots, permitting their harm may be damaging for society and as such we should consider introducing legislation to grant social robots rights and protect them from harm. I conclude that there is little evidence to support this claim and that legislation in this area would restrict progress in areas of social care where social robots are a potentially valuable resource.Author's Profile
DOI
10.1007/s11023-022-09593-y
My notes
Similar books and articles
The Influence of Robot Verbal Support on Human Team Members: Encouraging Outgroup Contributions and Suppressing Ingroup Supportive Behavior.Sarah Sebo, Ling Liang Dong, Nicholas Chang, Michal Lewkowicz, Michael Schutzman & Brian Scassellati - 2020 - Frontiers in Psychology 11.
Closeness, trust, and perceived social support in child-robot relationship formation.Caroline L. Van Straten, Rinaldo Kühne, Jochen Peter, Chiara de Jong & Alex Barco - 2020 - Interaction Studies 21 (1):57-84.
“Group Rights” and Racial Affirmative Action.Kwame Anthony Appiah - 2011 - The Journal of Ethics 15 (3):265-280.
Rights, indirect Harms and the non-identity problem: Articles.Justinpatrick Mcbrayer - 2008 - Bioethics 22 (6):299-306.
Robot rights? Towards a social-relational justification of moral consideration.Mark Coeckelbergh - 2010 - Ethics and Information Technology 12 (3):209-221.
Could you hate a robot? And does it matter if you could?Helen Ryland - 2021 - AI and Society 36 (2):637-649.
When is a robot a moral agent.John P. Sullins - 2006 - International Review of Information Ethics 6 (12):23-30.
Acknowledging Animal Rights: A Thomistic Perspective.Paul A. Macdonald - 2021 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 95 (1):95-116.
Using the social robot probo as a social story telling agent for children with ASD.Bram Vanderborght, Ramona Simut, Jelle Saldien, Cristina Pop, Alina S. Rusu, Sebastian Pintea, Dirk Lefeber & Daniel O. David - 2012 - Interaction Studies 13 (3):348-372.
Analytics
Added to PP
2022-03-08
Downloads
5 (#1,170,023)
6 months
1 (#451,398)
2022-03-08
Downloads
5 (#1,170,023)
6 months
1 (#451,398)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
References found in this work
Welcoming Robots into the Moral Circle: A Defence of Ethical Behaviourism.John Danaher - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2023-2049.
An enquiry concerning human understanding.David Hume - 1955 - In Steven M. Cahn (ed.), Exploring Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology. Oxford University Press. pp. 112.
The other question: can and should robots have rights?David J. Gunkel - 2018 - Ethics and Information Technology 20 (2):87-99.
Robot rights? Towards a social-relational justification of moral consideration.Mark Coeckelbergh - 2010 - Ethics and Information Technology 12 (3):209-221.