Intending to err: the ethical challenge of lethal, autonomous systems [Book Review]

Ethics and Information Technology 14 (4):241-254 (2012)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Current precursors in the development of lethal, autonomous systems (LAS) point to the use of biometric devices for assessing, identifying, and verifying targets. The inclusion of biometric devices entails the use of a probabilistic matching program that requires the deliberate targeting of noncombatants as a statistically necessary function of the system. While the tactical employment of the LAS may be justified on the grounds that the deliberate killing of a smaller number of noncombatants is better than the accidental killing of a larger number, it may nonetheless contravene a reemerging conception of right intention. Originally framed by Augustine of Hippo, this lesser-known formulation has served as the foundation for chivalric code, canon law, jus in bello criteria, and the law of armed conflict. Thus it serves as a viable measure to determine whether the use of lethal autonomy would accord with these other laws and principles. Specifically, examinations of the LAS through the lenses of collateral damage, the principle of double effect, and the principle of proportionality, reveal the need for more attention to be paid to the moral issues now, so that the promise of this emerging technology—that it will perform better than human beings—might actually come to pass.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,593

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

Autonomous reasons for intending.Randolph Clarke - 2008 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 86 (2):191 – 212.
Autonomy and Depression.Lubomira Radoilska - 2013 - In K. W. M. Fulford, Martin Davis, George Graham, John Sadler, Giovanni Stanghellini & Tim Thornton (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Psychiatry. Oxford University Press. pp. 1155-1170.
The case against robotic warfare: A response to Arkin.Ryan Tonkens - 2012 - Journal of Military Ethics 11 (2):149-168.
Industrial challenges of military robotics.George R. Lucas - 2011 - Journal of Military Ethics 10 (4):274-295.
A causal theory of intending.Wayne A. Davis - 1984 - American Philosophical Quarterly 21 (1):43-54.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-10-07

Downloads
33 (#419,057)

6 months
4 (#319,344)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mark Swiatek
United States Air Force Academy

References found in this work

Computing machinery and intelligence.Alan M. Turing - 1950 - Mind 59 (October):433-60.
The Morality of War.Brian Orend - 2006 - Broadview Press.
When is a robot a moral agent.John P. Sullins - 2006 - International Review of Information Ethics 6 (12):23-30.

View all 9 references / Add more references