Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (3):669-684 (2018)
AbstractTrolley cases are widely considered central to the ethics of autonomous vehicles. We caution against this by identifying four problems. Trolley cases, given technical limitations, rest on assumptions that are in tension with one another. Furthermore, trolley cases illuminate only a limited range of ethical issues insofar as they cohere with a certain design framework. Furthermore, trolley cases seem to demand a moral answer when a political answer is called for. Finally, trolley cases might be epistemically problematic in several ways. To put forward a positive proposal, we illustrate how ethical challenges arise from mundane driving situations. We argue that mundane situations are relevant because of the specificity they require and the scale they exhibit. We then illustrate some of the ethical challenges arising from optimizing for safety, balancing safety with other values such as mobility, and adjusting to incentives of legal frameworks.
Similar books and articles
Human Decisions in Moral Dilemmas Are Largely Described by Utilitarianism: Virtual Car Driving Study Provides Guidelines for Autonomous Driving Vehicles.Anja K. Faulhaber, Anke Dittmer, Felix Blind, Maximilian A. Wächter, Silja Timm, Leon R. Sütfeld, Achim Stephan, Gordon Pipa & Peter König - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (2):399-418.
Killing by Autonomous Vehicles and the Legal Doctrine of Necessity.Filippo Santoni de Sio - 2017 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 20 (2):411-429.
Autonomous Cars: In Favor of a Mandatory Ethics Setting.Jan Gogoll & Julian F. Müller - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (3):681-700.
The German Ethics Code for Automated and Connected Driving.Christoph Luetge - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (4):547-558.
Irresponsibilities, Inequalities and Injustice for Autonomous Vehicles.Hin-Yan Liu - 2017 - Ethics and Information Technology 19 (3):193-207.
A Rawlsian Algorithm for Autonomous Vehicles.Derek Leben - 2017 - Ethics and Information Technology 19 (2):107-115.
The “New Mind” Revisited, or Minding the Content/Vehicle Distinction: A Response to Manzotti and Pepperell.Andreas Elpidorou - 2013 - AI and Society 28 (4):461-466.
The Trolley Problem and the Dropping of Atomic Bombs.Masahiro Morioka - 2017 - Journal of Philosophy of Life 7 (2):316-337.
Responsibility for Crashes of Autonomous Vehicles: An Ethical Analysis.Alexander Hevelke & Julian Nida-Rümelin - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (3):619-630.
Trolley Cases and Being ‘In the Realm,’.Michael Barnwell - 2010 - Southwest Philosophical Studies 32:29-35.
The Delocalized Mind. Judgements, Vehicles, and Persons.Pierre Steiner - 2014 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 13 (3):1-24.
Responsibility Practices and Unmanned Military Technologies.Merel Noorman - 2014 - Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (3):809-826.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Why Trolley Problems Matter for the Ethics of Automated Vehicles.Geoff Keeling - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (1):293-307.
Making Moral Machines: Why We Need Artificial Moral Agents.Paul Formosa & Malcolm Ryan - forthcoming - AI and Society.
Autonomous Driving and Public Reason: A Rawlsian Approach.Claudia Brändle & Michael W. Schmidt - 2021 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (4):1475-1499.
Safety Requirements Vs. Crashing Ethically: What Matters Most for Policies on Autonomous Vehicles.Björn Lundgren - forthcoming - AI and Society:1-11.
Self-Driving Vehicles—an Ethical Overview.Sven Ove Hansson, Matts-Åke Belin & Björn Lundgren - 2021 - Philosophy and Technology 34 (4):1383-1408.
References found in this work
The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect.Philippa Foot - 1967 - Oxford Review 5:5-15.
Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right From Wrong.Wendell Wallach & Colin Allen - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1976 - The Monist 59 (2):204-217.
Pushing Moral Buttons: The Interaction Between Personal Force and Intention in Moral Judgment.Joshua D. Greene, Fiery A. Cushman, Lisa E. Stewart, Kelly Lowenberg, Leigh E. Nystrom & Jonathan D. Cohen - 2009 - Cognition 111 (3):364-371.