Why Social Robots Need Self-Preservation to Be Objects of Moral Consideration

Abstract

AbstractWhile there is a wide agreement today among researchers that robots lack the capacity to be conscious or sentient, two possible dangers are important to address today. Firstly, one could claim that a robot is sentient in the near future or even today in some way that we are not able to understand or verify. Secondly, if we decide to err on the side of caution and grant them legal protection anyway, we could be infringing on personal and intellectual freedom by restricting particular uses of robots or the research and development of said robots. This brings the question that is central to this paper: where can we draw the line? Put in another way, how can we know if SRs are objects of moral consideration (OMCs: such as dogs, bees, or trees) or an object of human desire (OHDs: such as toasters or toys)? This paper presents the condition of self-preservation as a necessary and sufficient condition to draw the line between OMCs and OHDs.