Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 365–378 | Cite as

The Ethical Knob: ethically-customisable automated vehicles and the law

  • Giuseppe Contissa
  • Francesca Lagioia
  • Giovanni Sartor
Article

Abstract

Accidents involving autonomous vehicles (AVs) raise difficult ethical dilemmas and legal issues. It has been argued that self-driving cars should be programmed to kill, that is, they should be equipped with pre-programmed approaches to the choice of what lives to sacrifice when losses are inevitable. Here we shall explore a different approach, namely, giving the user/passenger the task (and burden) of deciding what ethical approach should be taken by AVs in unavoidable accident scenarios. We thus assume that AVs are equipped with what we call an “Ethical Knob”, a device enabling passengers to ethically customise their AVs, namely, to choose between different settings corresponding to different moral approaches or principles. Accordingly, AVs would be entrusted with implementing users’ ethical choices, while manufacturers/programmers would be tasked with enabling the user’s choice and ensuring implementation by the AV.

Keywords

Autonomous vehicle Liability and automation Ethical dilemmas 

References

  1. Bonnefon JF, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2015) Autonomous vehicles need experimental ethics: are we ready for utilitarian cars? arXiv preprint arXiv:151003346
  2. Bonnefon JF, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2016) The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science 352(6293):1573–1576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Foot P (1967) The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review 5(1):5–15Google Scholar
  4. Gogoll J, Müller JF (2016) Autonomous cars: In favor of a mandatory ethics setting. Science and Engineering Ethics. doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9806-x
  5. Goodall NJ (2016) Away from trolley problems and toward risk management. Appl Artif Intell 30(8):810–821CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Leben D (2017) A Rawlsian algorithm for autonomous vehicles. Ethics Inf Technol 19(2):107–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lin P (2014) Here’s a terrible idea: robot cars with adjustable ethics settings. Wired com Available via http://www.wired.com/2014/08/heres-a-terrible-idea-robot-cars-with-adjustable-ethics-settings
  8. Lin P (2016) Why ethics matters for autonomous cars. In: Maurer M, Gerdes JC, Lenz B, Winner H (eds) Autonomous driving. Springer, pp 69–85Google Scholar
  9. Millar J (2015) Technology as moral proxy: autonomy and paternalism by design. IEEE Technol Soc Mag 34(2):47–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Nyholm S, Smids J (2016) The ethics of accident-algorithms for self-driving cars: an applied trolley problem? Ethical theory and moral practice pp 1–15, doi:10.1007/s10677-016-9745-2
  11. Rawls J (1999) A Theory of Justice, revised edn. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  12. Santoni de Sio F (2017) Killing by autonomous vehicles and the legal doctrine of necessity. Ethical Theory Moral Pract 20(2):411–429. doi:10.1007/s10677-017-9780-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Thomson JJ (1976) Killing, letting die, and the trolley problem. The Monist 59(2):204–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuseppe Contissa
    • 1
  • Francesca Lagioia
    • 1
  • Giovanni Sartor
    • 1
  1. 1.CIRSFIDUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations