Robots that incorporate the function of apologizing have emerged in recent years. This paper examines the moral permissibility of making robots apologize. First, I characterize the nature of apology based on analyses conducted in multiple scholarly domains. Next, I present a prima facie argument that robot apologies are not permissible because they may harm human societies by inducing the misattribution of responsibility. Subsequently, I respond to a possible response to the prima facie objection based on the interpretation that attributing responsibility (...) to a robot is analogous to having an attitude toward fiction. Then, I demonstrate that there are cases of robot apologies where the prima facie objection does not apply, by considering the following two points: (1) apology-related practices found in our human-to-human apologies, and (2) a difference in the degree of harm caused by robot failures and the resulting apologies. Finally, given the current norms governing our apology-related practices, I argue that some instances of making robots apologize are permissible, and I propose conducting critical robotics research questioning the validity of such norms. (shrink)

In the recent debate concerning the boundary of mind, the extended mind thesis (EMT), which states that our mind and cognition are extended into the environment, is influential as an antithesis to the internalist view, according to which mind and cognition are in the head. However, EMT has some serious difficulties. On the contrary to its proponents’ claim, EMT contributes neither to demystifying the mind, nor to promoting our understanding of cognition. Moreover, it leads to an extreme kind of individualism (...) by regarding environmental resources as constituents of individual human minds. After showing this, I explore an alternative anti-Cartesian picture of mind through citing Dewey’s view of the locus of mind. Although the proponents of EMT often invoke Dewey as a pioneer of their view, his view is in fact the one that should be called the ‘unbounded mind’ rather than the ‘extended mind’. Furthermore, I show that Dewey’s view indicates a root to overcome the individualistic dogma that is shared by internalists and the EMT theorists. (shrink)

When comparing aesthetic with moral values Ingarden does not define their mutual relation but tries to determine generic moments of various types. Neither aesthetic nor moral values can exist autonomously but require a vehicle. Aesthetic values appear as some qualifications of aesthetic objects, whereas moral values are some qualifications of conscious subjects and a proper structure both of subjects and of the world which must admit free actions is indispensable for the realisation of moral values. Ingarden admits the possibility of (...) a different mode at existence for moral values than for aesthetic ones, the former being more firmly rooted in their foundation. Values form hierarchies. Theory serve nothing but themselves and depend on no evaluation, Ingarden tries to demonstrate the objectivity of values, listing the conditions on which it depends, and postulates that a necessary correlation be sought between the properties of the vehicle and the values of determinate qualities. The main difference between aesthetic and moral values is that the latter are obligatory in character. This may be read from the content of their ideas. Values only partly go into the general ontology developed by Ingarden, but this ontology was no closed system even for himself and there is evidence that he may have expended his conception to embrace also the sphere of values. Ingarden described accurately neither the mode of existence nor the formal structure of va1ues. His closest interest belonged to their matter because in it he thought he might find the principle of grouping values into various genera. He regarded the study of the laws of co-existence of various value, as a major task of material ontology. Moral values may be credited with a higher dignitas than other values and their realisation is not without influence on the acting subject’s personality. In conclusion the authoress proposes to define value as a new qualitative dimension of the object serving as its vehicle. The value dimension of objects might go in various directions depending on the kind of value involved. (shrink)

Fidelity as a moral value which may qualify persons or determinate modes of behaviour is discussed. Some examples of fidelity are given to show that fidelity may have various forms depending on whom or what it concerns and how deeply one is engaged. Fidelity is determined as a personal value consisting in a persistent approval of some chosen ensembles of values, in connection with the willingness to serve them in the way required by them in various situations. If fidelity is (...) one of moral values there are applicable to it all the statements concerning moral values in general. The difference between fidelity and other moral values lies in the qualitative specificity which may be grasped intuitively. The realization of fidelity must be accomplished consciously and the corresponding acts must spring from the centre of our „ego”. The fidelity to the ensembles of values preferred to others should not violate the objective hierarchy of values, i.e., it should appear within orderly relations to the whole system of values. (shrink)

This book is a collection of all the papers published in the special issue “Artificial Intelligence, Robots, and Philosophy,” Journal of Philosophy of Life, Vol.13, No.1, 2023, pp.1-146. The authors discuss a variety of topics such as science fiction and space ethics, the philosophy of artificial intelligence, the ethics of autonomous agents, and virtuous robots. Through their discussions, readers are able to think deeply about the essence of modern technology and the future of humanity. All papers were invited and completed (...) in spring 2020, though because of the Covid-19 pandemic and other problems, the publication was delayed until this year. I apologize to the authors and potential readers for the delay. I hope that readers will enjoy these arguments on digital technology and its relationship with philosophy. *** -/- Contents*** -/- Introduction : Descartes and Artificial Intelligence; Masahiro Morioka*** -/- Isaac Asimov and the Current State of Space Science Fiction : In the Light of Space Ethics; Shin-ichiro Inaba*** -/- Artificial Intelligence and Contemporary Philosophy : Heidegger, Jonas, and Slime Mold; Masahiro Morioka*** -/- Implications of Automating Science : The Possibility of Artificial Creativity and the Future of Science; Makoto Kureha*** -/- Why Autonomous Agents Should Not Be Built for War; István Zoltán Zárdai*** -/- Wheat and Pepper : Interactions Between Technology and Humans; Minao Kukita*** -/- Clockwork Courage : A Defense of Virtuous Robots; Shimpei Okamoto*** -/- Reconstructing Agency from Choice; Yuko Murakami*** -/- Gushing Prose : Will Machines Ever be Able to Translate as Badly as Humans?; Rossa Ó Muireartaigh***. (shrink)