A Treatise on Good Robots

Krzysztof Tchon

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351296427
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Philosophy History & Theory

This volume investigates the ways emerging technologies in the fields of robotics and bio-robotics are influencing society. It necessarily considers both philosophical and technological study of robots, including what it means for robots to exist as good and moral entities, and how they benefit humans and enhance their quality of life. Contributors address artificial intelligence and social functions as well as technical matters. Chapters are wide-ranging, and consider robots in science fiction; the need for designers to create moral robots; specific technology; and the development of biological robots. Also addressed are robotic technologies already enhancing human bodies, such as exoskeletons that allow paraplegics to walk. The contributors foresee robots becoming involved not only in mundane domestic tasks such as washing dishes, but also in providing health care to the disabled and companionship to the elderly. This volume offers exciting philosophical reflections that unveil new connections between robotics and praxiology and their practical applications.

Part One

Good Robots—Human Perspective

How Good Robots Will Enhance Human Life

Kevin Warwick and Huma Shah

School of Systems Engineering University of Reading, UK

Anton Vedder

Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society Tilburg University, Netherlands

Elettra Stradella, University of Pisa, Italy

Pericle Salvini, Scuola Superior Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy

1. Introduction

The authors of this chapter, Kevin Warwick (KW), Huma Shah (HS), Anton Vedder (AV), Pericle Salvini (PS), and Elettra Stradella (ES) are research partners in a European Consortium entitled RoboLaw. The aim of their research is to investigate the ways in which emerging technologies in the field of (bio-) robotics (e.g., bionics, neural interfaces, and nanotechnologies) have a bearing on the content, meaning, and setting of the law. However, this necessarily involves both the philosophical and technological study of robots and what it means for the robots to exist as good and moral entities, and how they will enhance their human compatriots.

This chapter is wide ranging with each author’s section a standalone point considering robots in science fiction, including in the groundbreaking cinematic Metropolis ; the notion of good robots; the need for good designers to create good robots; the technology inside good robots; and morality in biological robots. Robots and robotic technologies are already enhancing human life, as in the case of cyborg artist Neil Harbisson with an implant and eyeborg device (see section by ES). Among the many realistic aims, future robots will be involved from the domestic mundane task of washing our dishes, to the healthcare and companionship of the elderly, to exoskeletons to enable the wheelchair bound to stand and walk, to assisting astronauts in space exploration for the good of humanity (CompanionAble 2012).

2. From Science Fiction through Science Fact and Science Future [HS]

The notion of an “artificial human” as slave, companion, and then overlord is centuries old. In the industrial era of the early twentieth century the Czech Capek brothers, Josef (painter and writer) and Karel (playwright) bequeathed the terms automat and robota to the world. But it is from the mind of Thea von Harbou, in the screenplay of her husband Fritz Lang’s 1927 silent era black and white epic Metropolis, described as “one of the most iconic and influential films of all time” and the first film “to be included on the UNESCO Memory of the World register of essential cultural artifacts” (Metropolis1927.com), that a stark image of cyborgs and machines emerged (see Figure 1, below).

Figure 1
From Left: Robot Creation; Robot Close-Up; Robot with Rotwang the Inventor; Robot Centre

In Metropolis, a technicized “mother of all cities,” the future is portrayed with workers, not walking but shuffling along their cramped haunt, exhausted from their shift in the machine halls deep underground while the liberated elite of the city enjoy a decadent lifestyle, as high above the lethargic workers as the latter’s subterranean living quarters are below (see Figure 2). The mechanical female, who cannot be distinguished from the mortal Maria, the heroine who gives the underground workers hope by prophesying a better future to come, is given Maria’s physical attributes and sexuality by the mad inventor Rotwang. The cyborg is programmed to wreak havoc and is charged with deceiving the workers to stir up trouble among them (YouTube 2012).

Figure 2
Metropolis: Elite City; Underground Workers

From Lang’s 1927 masterpiece many movies since have embraced this ill-wind portrayal of machines and robots, from 2001: A Space Odyssey with its murderous HAL computer, to Blade Runner ’s Nexus 6 Replicants seeking extended existence, to the killer cyborgs in the Terminator movies. With the advent of artificial intelligence the myth of the Frankenstein monster turning on its creator has now “entered the realm of the possible” (Lehman-Wilzig 1981: p. 442). There is a recurring theme in such films: robots are essentially untrustworthy, inherently malfeasant, and will become killers, so humanity is doomed. People are taking this seriously. Echoing Eliezer Yudkowsky et al.’s assessment of catastrophic risk from intelligences created by humans (2010), in April 2012, Cambridge University, UK set up a centre to study “existential risk” (CSER 2012). The trio behind the Cambridge quest (philosopher Huw Price, ex-Royal Society President Martin Rees, and co-Skype founder Jaan Tallinn) view developments in human technology as possible “extinction-level risk” to the human species (ibid). Price and Tallinn (2012) believe that the “caravan of narrow AI” driving specialist task-driven technology “moves steadily forward”; the philosopher and the technologist claim that machines have surpassed human performance in “chess, trivia games, flying, driving, financial trading, face, speech and handwriting recognition.” But why should this advancement be seen in a negative light? Could it be because we accept, open a broadsheet newspaper on any day to find news of, humans blighting other humans’ existence around the world as so common that a corollary follows that what we humans create will necessarily finish us, the unethical, the illogical, and the immoral species off?

Taking a step back we notice that human offspring often surpass their parents in many ways, yet how many kids bump their mother and father off? Human Rights Watch warns of killer robots (Human Rights Watch 2012), but unless they are programmed to, why should robots kill off humanity? Taking a step forward, could it not be the case that intelligent robots will show us humans the way to be humane; or to be more humane more often? Taking a bird’s eye view of the current step we find technology and robots advancing human life, bringing in the good and extracting the difficulties faced by some in their day-to-day living. Computers and the Internet connection allow us to have the “mother of all libraries” at our fingertips any time of the day or night, all the time enhancing our knowledge, increasing our intelligence. Smart mobile phones now incorporate high specification cameras, video capability, as well as many other functions including listening to our favorite tunes, making this product the first thing many of us see and use in the morning and last thing at night. Parking-assist technology in road vehicles has made it easier and easier to park cars in tight and difficult spots while reducing damage to its body. Advanced driver-assist technology is in the pipeline and self-driving cars “which conceive everything around them and make decisions about every aspect of driving” (Thrun 2011) will be seen on our roads in the near future helping to prevent traffic accidents, reducing injury and casualty. Wearable technologies, exoskeletons, assist the wheelchair bound to stand and walk; chip implants lift the depression from patients like Brandy Ellis, to help them feel human and be a part of the society (BBC 2012). Domestic robot technologies mow our lawns and hoover around the home. Robots are being developed to help astronauts work in space (NASA’s 2012, Robonaut ), to care for and companionate the elderly (CompanionAble’s Hector ), while some humanoids are destined to fulfill desires as sexbots for the paying sex market (Levy 2012). Robot prostitutes could reduce the violence and inhumanity suffered by many humans forced into this profession; whether it would be ethical to create “child robots” to assuage the desires of pedophiles, thus mitigating the threat to vulnerable children, is a debate for another day.

These are but a few examples of robots and robotic technologies that already enhance, and will enhance human life. The robots of the future could be tiny and in our head allowing us a cinema or concert experience anytime we should choose; they could be personalized and wearable technologies that transport us safely along the roads, or fly us to Cancun or Hawaii on a cold winter’s day in Europe. If we can imagine “good” then there is no reason for future robots not to be designed to “be good” and further improve the quality of human life.

3. Good Robot [AV]

What can the notion of “good” mean in the expression “good robot”? One might think that this question arises merely because currently a robot is still a phenomenon seldom seen. Since robots are still rare, people will find it difficult to explain what a good robot looks like. However, even in the presence of an abundance of robots it might still be difficult to decide what a good robot would amount to. “Good” is a primarily a formal notion referring to several other properties and dimensions of objects and even to norms and classifications in the minds of the users of the vocabulary. Notions such as these have been called “essentially contested” (Gallie 1956), meaning that their definitions will go on to provoke controversies, since the norms and classifications at issue will understandably be the subject of ongoing debates.

Although any hope of final and conclusive answers to our initial q uestion is therefore probably in vain, we might nonetheless kindle reflection on the issue by looking at the use of the notion of good in combination with a machine, a human being, and an animal respectively.

What is a good vacuum cleaner? A good vacuum cleaner is undoubtedly a machine that cleans well, helps you to get rid of dirt and dust in the first place. The primary criterion for goodness of a machine seems to build on its functionality: the degree to which it does what it was made for, in this case: cleaning. Additional—but not unimportant—reasons for calling it good may be found in side-aspects of the good functioning of the machine: that it cleans well without using too much energy, neither in terms of power—electricity—nor in terms of the physical involvement of the person who operates the machine, that it does not cause any accidental damage, and that it manifests some constancy with regard to its performance and operating life. Both the primary and the additional criteria for its goodness have to do with expectations of people with regard to this type of machine. Of course, these expectations are somehow informed by the current state of art in the relevant techniques and technologies, or even by de facto and formal technical standards, but we can safely assume that in day-to-day conversations they are based on implicit or explicit expectations, which a specific machine is or is not living up to.

What is a good man or a good woman? It is difficult to think of other definitions of good men and women than definitions in moral terms. Again, the exact definition might depend on the moral stand one takes: A Kantian may say that a good man or woman is a person generally acting in accordance with moral principles. A Utilitarian might argue that a good man or woman is a person whose behavior and life style brings about the greatest utility for most people affected. An advocate of virtue ethics again may contend that a good man or woman is a person who shows excellence of character, attitudes, and actions. This latter view of the good person may come closest to the way in which we define good when referring to machines: often advocates of virtue theories refer to a unique characteristic or purpose of human beings, for example, being rational or being a social being, when stipulating the specific excellences of character, attitudes, and action.

What is a good dog? It may seem a bit odd to refer to a dog as “a good dog.” It reminds us of the good machine, on the one hand, and of the good person, on the other. But it is difficult for us to think of animals in general as having a purpose or having a function. Of course, animals kept with a special purpose, such as giving milk, towing, or guiding blind people, might be referred to as a good milk cow, a good workhorse, or a good seeing-eye dog, respectively. They will nonetheless only somewhat awkwardly be referred to as good animals or as a good cow, good horse, or good dog. The association with the goodness of persons is also awkward. With regard to people, “good” connotes the morality of an actor, and it is certainly odd to think of animals as moral actors. Perhaps the closest we could get to meaningful use would be by defining “good dog” in terms of behaving well or of minimal decency (not barking at us or biting us) and, again, living up to our expectation.

Having seen this: What would a good robot be? Perhaps we might distinguish the following possibilities:

• A robot that is functioning well, doing what it is expected to do, with a reasonable life span, and not requiring too much attention or maintenance.
• A robot that is morally good (as far as its behavior and its consequences are concerned, and, depending on its degree of autonomy, its “attit...