The ethics of crashes with self-driving cars
A roadmap, II
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4079627 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sven Nyholm (0000-0002-3836-5932, Eindhoven University of Technology, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 7 |
| Publication date | 2018-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy Compass (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1747-9991 • E-ISSN: 1747-9991 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/phc3.12506 |
| OpenAlex | W2804315258 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 24 |
| References cited | 25 |
Self-driving cars hold out the promise of being much safer than regular cars. Yet they cannot be 100% safe. Accordingly, we need to think about who should be held responsible when self-driving cars crash and people are injured or killed. We also need to examine what new ethical obligations might be created for car users by the safety potential of self-driving cars. The article first considers what lessons might be learned from the growing legal literature on responsibility for crashes with self-driving cars. Next, worries about responsibility gaps and retribution gaps from the philosophical literature are introduced. This leads to a discussion of whether self-driving cars are a form of agents that act independently of human agents. It is suggested that it is better to analyze their apparent agency in terms of human-robot collaborations, within which humans play the most important roles. The next topic is the idea that the safety potential of self-driving cars might create a duty to either switch to self-driving cars or seek means of making conventional cars safer. Lastly, there is a short discussion of ethical issues related to safe human-robot coordination within mixed traffic featuring both self-driving cars and conventional cars
Agency (philosophy · Business · Computer security · Crash · Duty · Political science · SAFER · Self driving · Sociology · Transport engineering · Computer Science · Engineering · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Free Will and Agency · Law · Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Experimental Philosophy of Technology
A neo-aristotelian perspective on the need for artificial moral agents (AMAs)
Values for a Post-Pandemic Future
On the ethics of algorithmic decision-making in healthcare
A willingness to be vulnerable
The European Commission report on ethics of connected and automated vehicles and the future of ethics of transportation
Moral sensitivity and the limits of artificial moral agents
Addressing inequal risk exposure in the development of automated vehicles
The Relativistic Car
Instrumental Robots
Correctness and Completeness of Programming Instructions for Traffic Circulation
Hiding Behind Machines
Customizable Ethics Settings for Building Resilience and Narrowing the Responsibility Gap
Machine learning in healthcare and the methodological priority of epistemology over ethics
Is tomorrow’s car appealing today? Ethical issues and user attitudes beyond automation
Safety requirements vs. crashing ethically
Why Not Road Ethics
Ethical machine decisions and the input-selection problem
Self-Driving Vehicles—an Ethical Overview
Pluralism and the Design of Autonomous Vehicles
Programming Away Human Rights and Responsibilities? “The Moral Machine Experiment” and the Need for a More “Humane” AV Future
Of trolleys and self-driving cars
Saving Private Robot
AI responsibility gap
Moral Machines
The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars
Killer Robots
The Case for Ethical Autonomy in Unmanned Systems
Robots, law and the retribution gap
Freedom as Antipower
Public Health, Ethics, and Autonomous Vehicles
Moral Dimensions
Our Bodies in the Trolley's Path, or Why Self-driving Cars Must *Not* Be Programmed to Kill
| Citations per year | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2020 - 2025 (6) |
| Highly cited | No |