Independent systems and robots can be of great help to achieve goals and obtain optimal solutions to problems caused by the quantity, variation and complexity of information. However, we always face ethical issues related to the design as well as to the running of such systems. There are many problems, theoretical and practical, in integrating ethical decision making to robots. It is impossible to design or run such systems independently of human wish or will. Even if we create totally independent decision making systems, we would not want to lose control. Can we create really independent ethical decision systems? Recent research showed that emotions are necessary in the process of decision making. It seems that it is necessary for an independent decision system to have “emotions.” In other words, a kind of ultimate purpose is needed that can lead the decision process. This could make a system really independent and by that ethical.


robots systems autonomous independent decision making ethics moral 


  1. 1.
    Πλάτων [Platon]: Θεαίτητος [Theaitetos]. I.Zαχαρόπουλος [I. Zacharopoulos], Aθήνα [Athens] (1981) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Πλάτων [Platon]: Aπολογία Σωκράτους [Apology of Socrates]. Kάκτος [Kaktos], Aθήνα [Athens] (1992) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Πλάτων [Platon]: Πολιτεία [The Republic]. Kάκτος [Kaktos], Aθήνα [Athens] (1992) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aριστοτέλης [Aristoteles]: Hθικά Nικομάχεια [Nicomachean Ethics]. (Πάπυρος [Papyros], Aθήνα [Athens]) (1975) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kant, I.: Grundläggning av Sedernas Metafysik [Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals]. Daidalos, Stockholm (1785/2006) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Piaget, J.: The Moral Judgement of the Child. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London (1932)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kohlberg, L.: The Just Community: Approach to Moral Education in Theory and Practice. In: Berkowitz, M., Oser, F. (eds.) Moral Education: Theory and Application, pp. 27–87. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1985)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sunstein, C.R.: Moral Heuristics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28, 531–573 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kavathatzopoulos, I.: Assessing and Acquiring Ethical Leadership Competence. In: Prastacos, G.P., et al. (eds.) Leadership through the Classics, pp. 389–400. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kavathatzopoulos, I., Laaksoharju, M.: Computer Aided Ethical Systems Design. In: Arias-Oliva, M., et al. (eds.) The “Backwards, Forwards, and Sideways” Changes of ICT, pp. 332–340. Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Laaksoharju, M.: Let us be Philosophers! Computerized Support for Ethical Decision Making. Uppsala University, Department of Information Technology, Uppsala (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laaksoharju, M., Kavathatzopoulos, I.: Computerized Support for Ethical Analysis. In: Botti, M., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of CEPE 2009 – Eighth International Computer Ethics and Philosophical Enquiry Conference. Ionian University, Kerkyra (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kavathatzopoulos, I.: Philosophizing as a usability method. CEPE 2013, Ambiguous Technologies: Philosophical Issues, Practical Solutions, Human Nature. Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa, Lisbon (in press, 2013) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kohlberg, L.: The Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice. Harper and Row, San Francisco (1984)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wallace, W., Allen, C.: Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong. Oxford University Press, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koenigs, M., Tranel, D.: Irrational Economic Decision-Making after Ventromedial Prefrontal Damage: Evidence from the Ultimatum Game. The Journal of Neuroscience 27, 951–956 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Iordanis Kavathatzopoulos
    • 1
  • Ryoko Asai
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of IT – VIIUppsala UniversitySweden

Personalised recommendations