Robots: ethical by design [Book Review]
Ethics and Information Technology 14 (1):61-71 (2012)
|Abstract||Among ethicists and engineers within robotics there is an ongoing discussion as to whether ethical robots are possible or even desirable. We answer both of these questions in the positive, based on an extensive literature study of existing arguments. Our contribution consists in bringing together and reinterpreting pieces of information from a variety of sources. One of the conclusions drawn is that artifactual morality must come in degrees and depend on the level of agency, autonomy and intelligence of the machine. Moral concerns for agents such as intelligent search machines are relatively simple, while highly intelligent and autonomous artifacts with significant impact and complex modes of agency must be equipped with more advanced ethical capabilities. Systems like cognitive robots are being developed that are expected to become part of our everyday lives in future decades. Thus, it is necessary to ensure that their behaviour is adequate. In an analogy with artificial intelligence, which is the ability of a machine to perform activities that would require intelligence in humans, artificial morality is considered to be the ability of a machine to perform activities that would require morality in humans. The capacity for artificial (artifactual) morality, such as artifactual agency, artifactual responsibility, artificial intentions, artificial (synthetic) emotions, etc., come in varying degrees and depend on the type of agent. As an illustration, we address the assurance of safety in modern High Reliability Organizations through responsibility distribution. In the same way that the concept of agency is generalized in the case of artificial agents , the concept of moral agency, including responsibility, is generalized too. We propose to look at artificial moral agents as having functional responsibilities within a network of distributed responsibilities in a socio-technological system. This does not take away the responsibilities of the other stakeholders in the system, but facilitates an understanding and regulation of such networks. It should be pointed out that the process of development must assume an evolutionary form with a number of iterations because the emergent properties of artifacts must be tested in real world situations with agents of increasing intelligence and moral competence. We see this paper as a contribution to the macro-level Requirement Engineering through discussion and analysis of general requirements for design of ethical robots|
|Keywords||Artificial morality Machine ethics Machine morality Roboethics Autonomous agents Artifactual responsibility Functional responsibility|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Gordana Dodig Crnkovic & Daniel Persson (2008). Sharing Moral Responsibility with Robots: A Pragmatic Approach. In Holst, Per Kreuger & Peter Funk (eds.), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications Volume 173. IOS Press Books.
Ryan Tonkens (2009). A Challenge for Machine Ethics. Minds and Machines 19 (3):421-438.
Jeffrey White (forthcoming). Manufacturing Morality A General Theory of Moral Agency Grounding Computational Implementations: The ACTWith Model. In Computational Intelligence. Nova Publications.
Christopher Wareham (2011). On the Moral Equality of Artificial Agents. International Journal of Technoethics 2 (1):35-42.
Wendell Wallach, Colin Allen & Iva Smit (2007). Machine Morality: Bottom-Up and Top-Down Approaches for Modelling Human Moral Faculties. [REVIEW] AI and Society 22 (4):565-582.
Colin Allen, Iva Smit & Wendell Wallach (2005). Artificial Morality: Top-Down, Bottom-Up, and Hybrid Approaches. [REVIEW] Ethics and Information Technology 7 (3):149-155.
Ryan Tonkens (2012). Out of Character: On the Creation of Virtuous Machines. [REVIEW] Ethics and Information Technology 14 (2):137-149.
Mark Coeckelbergh (2010). Moral Appearances: Emotions, Robots, and Human Morality. [REVIEW] Ethics and Information Technology 12 (3):235-241.
Luciano Floridi & J. W. Sanders (2004). On the Morality of Artificial Agents. Minds and Machines 14 (3):349-379.
Stephen Petersen (2007). The Ethics of Robot Servitude. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 19 (1):43-54.
David J. Chalmers (2010). The Singularity: A Philosophical Analysis. Journal of Consciousness Studies 17 (9-10):9 - 10.
C. T. A. Schmidt & F. Kraemer (2006). Robots, Dennett and the Autonomous: A Terminological Investigation. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 16 (1):73-80.
Deborah G. Johnson & Keith W. Miller (2008). Un-Making Artificial Moral Agents. Ethics and Information Technology 10 (2-3):123-133.
Frances S. Grodzinsky, Keith W. Miller & Marty J. Wolf (2008). The Ethics of Designing Artificial Agents. Ethics and Information Technology 10 (2-3):115-121.
S. Grodzinsky Frances, W. Miller Keith & J. Wolf Marty (forthcoming). The Ethics of Designing Artificial Agents. Ethics and Information Technology.
Added to index2011-10-15
Total downloads16 ( #81,690 of 722,722 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,247 of 722,722 )
How can I increase my downloads?