Tragic Choices and the Virtue of Techno-Responsibility Gaps

Philosophy and Technology 35 (2):1-26 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a concern that the widespread deployment of autonomous machines will open up a number of ‘responsibility gaps’ throughout society. Various articulations of such techno-responsibility gaps have been proposed over the years, along with several potential solutions. Most of these solutions focus on ‘plugging’ or ‘dissolving’ the gaps. This paper offers an alternative perspective. It argues that techno-responsibility gaps are, sometimes, to be welcomed and that one of the advantages of autonomous machines is that they enable us to embrace certain kinds of responsibility gap. The argument is based on the idea that human morality is often tragic. We frequently confront situations in which competing moral considerations pull in different directions and it is impossible to perfectly balance these considerations. This heightens the burden of responsibility associated with our choices. We cope with the tragedy of moral choice in different ways. Sometimes we delude ourselves into thinking the choices we make were not tragic ; sometimes we delegate the tragic choice to others ; sometimes we make the choice ourselves and bear the psychological consequences. Each of these strategies has its benefits and costs. One potential advantage of autonomous machines is that they enable a reduced cost form of delegation. However, we only gain the advantage of this reduced cost if we accept that some techno-responsibility gaps are virtuous.

Similar books and articles

Moral Dilemmas and Collective Responsibilities.Jessica B. Payson - 2009 - Essays in Philosophy 10 (2):160-182.
Tragic Choices in Humanitarian Health Work.Matthew Hunt, Christina Sinding & Lisa Schwartz - 2012 - Journal of Clinical Ethics 23 (4):338-344.
Technological delegation: Responsibility for the unintended.Katinka Waelbers - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):51-68.
Parental Responsibility: A Moving Target.Kristien Hens, Daniela Cutas & Dorothee Horstkötter - 2016 - In Kristien Hens, Daniela Cutas & Dorothee Horstkötter (eds.), Parental Responsibility in the Context of Neuroscience and Genetics. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Sentimentalism and Moral Dilemmas.András Szigeti - 2015 - Dialectica 69 (1):1-22.
Gratitude to God for Our Own Moral Goodness.Robert J. Hartman - 2022 - Faith and Philosophy 39 (2):189-204.
Group Responsibility.Christian List - 2022 - In Dana Kay Nelkin & Derk Pereboom (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Moral Responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.
Responsibility and distributive justice.Carl Knight & Zofia Stemplowska (eds.) - 2011 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Collective Responsibility Gaps.Stephanie Collins - 2019 - Journal of Business Ethics 154 (4):943-954.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-03-11

Downloads
597 (#28,186)

6 months
167 (#16,898)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

John Danaher
University College, Galway

Citations of this work

Artificial intelligence and responsibility gaps: what is the problem?Peter Königs - 2022 - Ethics and Information Technology 24 (3):1-11.
Uses and Abuses of AI Ethics.Lily E. Frank & Michal Klincewicz - forthcoming - In David J. Gunkel (ed.), Handbook of the Ethics of AI. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Free Will, Agency, and Meaning in Life.Derk Pereboom - 2014 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Living Without Free Will.Derk Pereboom - 2001 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
A Natural History of Human Morality.Michael Tomasello (ed.) - 2015 - Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

View all 84 references / Add more references