Ethical Aspects of social Robotics

Occupation: Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy and Law, Perm National Research Polytechnic University.
Affiliation: Perm National Research Polytechnic University.
Address: Russian Federation, Perm

Journal name

Chelovek

Edition

Volume 31 Issue №4

Pages

109-127

Abstract

The paper explores the ethics of robotics as a branch of technoethics and the history of its formation and development. Three interpretations of ethics in the field of robotics are outlined. The first meaning deals with the professional ethics of robot engineers and designers and coincides with the term “roboethics” proposed by Gianmarco Verrugio. The second meaning (“ethics of robotics”) is related to the development of moral code programmed into robots. The third meaning (“robot’s ethics”) refers to considering robots as fully moral agents and has more to do with science fiction and theorizing rather than with the actual scope of research. The framework for analyzing the development of autonomous moral agents by Colin Allen and Wendell Wallach is used to investigate the dependence between autonomy of robots and their ethical sensitivity, which refers to the capability of robotic systems to be sensitive to morally relevant facts and to make moral choices. In this regard, we consider the option of progressing from operational morality, according to which the actions of machines are completely dependent on engineers and consumers, to the so-called functional morality, when machines will be able to evaluate their own actions and deal with moral challenges. Two main approaches to programming social robots are described: a top-down rule-based approach relying on ethical theories such as deontology and consequentialism (utilitarianism), as well as a bottom-up approach with an emphasis on virtue ethics. The top-down approach is considered from the perspective of anti-imperative criticism drawing upon Kant’s categorical imperative, Asimov’s three laws of robotics, and the utilitarian principle of maximum happiness for the maximum number of people. The paper investigates the potential benefits of virtue ethics and morality as a reflection of socio-cultural values for programming autonomous social robots.

Keywords

social robotics, ethics of robotics, roboethics, autonomous moral agents, operational morality, functional morality, deontology, consequentialism (utilitarianism), ethics of virtues

Received

29.09.2020

Publication date

29.09.2020

Number of characters

33566

Cite

GOST	Seredkina E. Ethical Aspects of social Robotics // Chelovek – 2020. – V. 31. – Issue №4 C. 109-127 [Electronic resource]. URL: https://chelovek-journal.ru/S023620070010933-3-1 (circulation date: 20.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S023620070010933-3
MLA	Seredkina, Elena V "Ethical Aspects of social Robotics." Chelovek 31.4 (2020):109-127. DOI: 10.31857/S023620070010933-3
APA	Seredkina E. (2020). Ethical Aspects of social Robotics. Chelovek 31(4), pp.109-127 DOI: 10.31857/S023620070010933-3

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 880

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Apresyan R.G., Artemyeva O.V., Prokofyev A.V. Fenomen moral'noy imperativnosti. Kriticheskiye ocherki [The phenomenon of moral normativity. Critical essay]. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences Publ., 2018.

2. Vvedenskaya E.V. Aktual'nyye problemy roboetiki [Actual problems of roboetics]. Naukovedcheskiye issledovaniya]. Moscow: Institute of Scientific Information for Social Sciences RAS Publ., 2019. P. 88–101.

3. Grunvald A., Zheleznyak V.N., Seredkina E.V. Bespilotnyy avtomobil' v svete sotsial'noy otsenki tekhniki [Driverless cars in the context of technology assessment]. Tekhnologos. 2019. N 2. P. 4–51.

4. Kant I. Kritika prakticheskogo razuma: per. s nem. [Critique of Pure Reason: transl. from German]. St. Petersburg: Nauka Publ., 1995.

5. Model'naya konventsiya o robototekhnike i iskusstvennom intellekte [Model Convention on Robotics and Artificial Intelligence, 2017]. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://robopravo.ru/modielnaia_konvientsiia (date of access: 12.06.2020).

6. Nikolina N.V. Primeneniye teorii freymov v reshenii problemy predposylochnogo znaniya [Applying of the theory of frames to solve the problems of premised knowledge]. Vestnik TGU. Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya. 2017. N 39. P. 40–47.

7. Osawa H., Hase S., Miyamoto D., et al. Vliyaniye nauchnoy fantastiki na predstavleniya o budushchem iskusstvennogo intellekta [The Impact of Science Fiction on the Future of Artificial Intelligence]. Tekhnologos. 2020. N 2.

8. Abney K. Robotics, ethical theory, and metaetics: A guide for the perplexed. Robot ethics: The ethical and social implications of robotics. Cambridge: MIT Press. 2012. P. 35–52.

9. Allen C., Wallah W. Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong. Oxford: Univ. Press, 2009.

10. EURON Roboethics Roadmap, ed. by Verruggio G. Genoa, 2006. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.roboethics.org/atelier2006/docs/R0B0ETHICS%20R0ADMAP%20Rel2.1.1.pdf (date of access: 12.06.2020).

11. Guarini M. Particularism, Analogy, and Moral Cognition. Minds and Machines. Vol. 20. N 3. P. 385–422. DOI: 10.1007/s11023-010-9200-4.

12. Lin P., Abney K., Bekey G. Ethics, War and Robots. Ethics and Emerging Technologies, ed. by Sandler R.L. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.

13. Malle B.F. Integrating robot ethics and machine morality: the study and design of moral competence in robots. Ethics and Information Technology. 2016. Vol. 18. P. 243–256. DOI: 10.1007/s10676-015-9367-8.

14. Roboethics: Humans, Machines and Health: The Workshop (25th-26th February 2019, the Pontifical Academy for Life, Rome, Italy). [Electronic resource].URL: https://www.academyforlife.va/content/pav/en/news/2018/humans--machines-and-health--workshop-2019.html pdf (date of access: 12.06.2020).

15. Statement on the Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and ‘Autonomous’ Systems / European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies. Brussels: Publ. Office of the EU, 2018. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/research/ege/pdf/ege_ai_statement_2018.pdf (date of access: 12.06.2020).

16. The ethics, social, humanitarian and ecological aspects of Robotics: The First International Symposium on Roboethics (30th – 31rd January 2004, Villa Nobel, Sanremo, Italy). [Electronic resource]. URL: https://www.roboethics.org/sanremo2004/ (date of access: 12.06.2020).

17. Tzafestas S. G. (2018). Roboethics: Fundamental concepts and future prospects. Information. 2018. N 9 (6): 148. DOI: 10.3390/info9060148.

18. Tzafestas S.G. Roboethics: A Navigating Overview. Berlin: Springer, 2015.

19. Veruggio G. The birth of roboethics. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation: Workshop on Robot Ethics. Barcelona, Spain. 2005. 18 April. P.1–4.

20. Wallach W., Allen C., Smith I. Machine morality: bottom-up and top-down approaches for modelling human moral faculties. AI & Soc 22. 2008. Vol. 22. N 4. P. 565–582. DOI: 10.1007/s00146-007-0099-0.

21. Xu Y., Wang P. The frame problem, the relevance problem, and a package solution to both. Synthese. 2012. Vol. 187. P. 43–72.