Abstract
The development of pet robots, toy robots, and sex robots suggests a near-future scenario of habitual living with ‘personal’ robots. How should we evaluate their potential impact on the quality of our lives and existence?
In this paper, I argue for an approach to ethics of personal robots that advocates a methodological turn from robots to humans, from mind to interaction, from intelligent thinking to social-emotional being, from reality to appearance, from right to good, from external criteria to good internal to practice, and from theory to experience and imagination. First I outline what I take to be a common approach to roboethics, then I sketch the contours of an alternative methodology: ethics of personal robots as an ethics of appearance, human good, experience, and imagination.
The result is a sketch of an empirically informed anthropocentric ethics that aims at understanding and evaluating what robots do to humans as social and emotional beings in virtue of their appearance, in particular how they may contribute to human good and human flourishing. Starting from concrete experience and practice and being sufficiently sensitive to individual and cultural differences, this approach invites us to be attentive to how human good emerges in human–robot interaction and to imagine, possibilities of living with personal robots that help to constitute good human lives.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Cerqui D, Arras KO (2001) Human beings and robots: towards a symbiosis? In: Carrasquero J et al (eds) A 2000 people survey. Post-conference proceedings PISTA 03 (Politics and Information Systems: Technologies and Applications), pp 408–413
Turkle S (2005) Relational artefacts/children/elders: the complexities of cybercompanions. In: Android science workshop, Stresa (Italy). Cognitive Science Society, pp 62–73
Levy D (2007) Love and sex with robots: the evolution of human–robot relationships. Harper Collins, New York
Haselager WFG (2005) Robotics, philosophy and the problems of autonomy. Pragmat Cogn 13(3):515–532
Floridi L, Sanders JW (2004) On the morality of artificial agents. Minds Mach 14:349–379
Asaro P (2006) What should we want from a robot ethic? Int Rev Inf Ethics 6:10–16
Clark A, Grush R (1999) Towards a cognitive robotics. Adapt Behav 7(1):5–16
Clark A (2001) Reasons, robots and the extended mind. Mind Lang 16(2):121–145
Epstein RG (1999) Review of Hans Moravec, Robot: Mere machine to a transcendent mind. Ethics Inf Technol 1:227–236
Turing AM (1950) Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59:433–460
Searl J (1980) Minds, brains and programs. Behav Brain Sci 3(3):417–457
Kitamura T, Tahara T, Asami K-I (2000) How can a robot have consciousness? Adv Robot 14(4):263–275
Torrance S (2007) Ethics and consciousness in artificial agents. Artif Intell Soc 22:495–521
Ishii K (2006) Cognitive robotics to understand human beings. Q Rev 20:11–32
Levy D (2008) The ethical treatment of artificially conscious robots. Paper presented at the 1st international conference on human–robot personal relationships, Maastricht University, June 13, 2008
Veruggio G (2006) EURON roboethics roadmap (release 1.1). EURON Roboethics Atelier, Genua
Bruce A, Nourbakhsh I, Simmons R (2002) The role of expressiveness and attention in human–robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE international conference on robotics & automation, Washington, DC, May 2002, pp 4138–4142
Duffy BR (2003) Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robot Auton Syst 42:177–190
Mori M (1970) Bukimi no tani (The uncanny valley). Energy 7(4):33–35. (Original in Japanese, translated by MacDorman KF & Minato T)
Breazeal C (2003) Emotion and sociable humanoid robots. Int J Human–Comp Stud 59:119–155
Taggart W, Turkle S, Kidd CD (2005) An interactive robot in a nursing home: preliminary remarks. In: Android science workshop, Stresa (Italy). Cognitive Science Society, pp 56–61
Reeves B, Nass C (1996) The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Ramey CH (2005) “For the sake of others”: the personal ethics of human–android interaction. In: Android science workshop, Stresa (Italy). Cognitive Science Society, pp 137–148
Nussbaum MC (2006) Frontiers of justice. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Coeckelbergh M (2009) Health care, capabilities, and AI assistive technologies. Ethic Theory Moral Pract (forthcoming)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
About this article
Cite this article
Coeckelbergh, M. Personal Robots, Appearance, and Human Good: A Methodological Reflection on Roboethics. Int J of Soc Robotics 1, 217–221 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-009-0026-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-009-0026-2