Abstract
AbstractRobots are becoming more visible parts of our life, a situation which prompts questions about their place in our society. One group of issues that is widely discussed is connected with robots’ moral and legal status as well as their potential rights. The question of granting robots rights is polarizing. Some positions accept the possibility of granting them human rights whereas others reject the notion that robots can be considered potential rights holders. In this paper, I claim that robots will never have all human rights, even if we accept that they are morally equal to humans. I focus on the role of embodiment in the content of the law. I claim that even relatively small differences in the ontologies of entities could lead to the need to create new sets of rights. I use the example of Neanderthals to illustrate that entities similar to us might have required different legal statuses. Then, I discuss the potential legal status of human-like robots.
Funder
Academy of Finland
University of Helsinki including Helsinki University Central Hospital
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Science Applications
Reference100 articles.
1. Abbott, R. (2020). The Reasonable Robot: Artificial Intelligence and the Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108631761
2. Andersen, F., & Anjum, R. L., and Elena Rocca (2019). Philosophical Bias Is the One Bias That Science Cannot Avoid. ELife, 8(March), e44929. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44929
3. Appleby, R. G., & Smith, B. P. (2018). “Do Wild Canids Kill for Fun?”. Wild Animals and Leisure. Routledge
4. Asaro, P. (2007). “Robots and Responsibility from a Legal Perspective.” Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation
5. Ashworth, A. J. (1975). Self-Defence and the Right to Life. The Cambridge Law Journal, 34(2), 282–307
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献