PofoliaShared via Pofolia

The MIT Press eBooks· 2018· Book chapter

Robot Rights

David J. Gunkel

Short summary

Philosopher David Gunkel argues that existing moral and legal frameworks fail to adequately address the social status of increasingly prevalent robots, proposing a novel approach to conceptualize their standing.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Robots are increasingly integrated into social reality, yet their social status is under-examined.
  • The book explores the philosophical case for granting rights to robots and other technological artifacts.
  • Existing arguments for robot rights are critiqued using the 'is'/'ought' philosophical distinction.
  • A new conceptual framework is proposed to address the moral and legal standing of robots.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

A provocative attempt to think about what was previously considered unthinkable: a serious philosophical case for the rights of robots. We are in the midst of a robot invasion, as devices of different configurations and capabilities slowly but surely come to take up increasingly important positions in everyday social reality—self-driving vehicles, recommendation algorithms, machine learning decision making systems, and social robots of various forms and functions. Although considerable attention has already been devoted to the subject of robots and responsibility, the question concerning the social status of these artifacts has been largely overlooked. In this book, David Gunkel offers a provocative attempt to think about what has been previously regarded as unthinkable: whether and to what extent robots and other technological artifacts of our own making can and should have any claim to moral and legal standing. In his analysis, Gunkel invokes the philosophical distinction (developed by David Hume) between “is” and “ought” in order to evaluate and analyze the different arguments regarding the question of robot rights. In the course of his examination, Gunkel finds that none of the existing positions or proposals hold up under scrutiny. In response to this, he then offers an innovative alternative proposal that effectively flips the script on the is/ought problem by introducing another, altogether different way to conceptualize the social situation of robots and the opportunities and challenges they present to existing moral and legal systems.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. The MIT Press eBooks, 2018 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Law

LawSocial Sciences