The ethics of crashes with self-driving cars
A roadmap, I
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4745071 |
|---|---|
| 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/phc3.12507 |
| OpenAlex | W4250284007 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 29 |
| References cited | 25 |
Self-driving cars hold out the promise of being much safer than regular cars. Yet they cannot be 100% safe. Accordingly, they need to be programmed for how to deal with crash scenarios. Should cars be programmed to always prioritize their owners, to minimize harm, or to respond to crashes on the basis of some other type of principle? The article first discusses whether everyone should have the same "ethics settings." Next, the oft-made analogy with the trolley problem is examined. Then follows an assessment of recent empirical work on lay-people's attitudes about crash algorithms relevant to the ethical issue of crash optimization. Finally, the article discusses what traditional ethical theories such as utilitarianism, Kantianism, virtue ethics, and contractualism imply about how cars should handle crash scenarios. The aim of the article is to provide an overview of the existing literature on these topics and to assess how far the discussion has gotten so far
Analogy · Business · Computer security · Contractualism · Crash · Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Harm · Law and economics · Motor vehicle crash · Poison control · Political science · Risk analysis (engineering · SAFER · Sociology · Utilitarianism · Virtue · Virtue ethics · Computer Science · Engineering · Ethics and Social Impacts of AI · Free Will and Agency · Human Factors and Ergonomics · Law · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Social Psychology
Driving phronesis as a milestone for engineering autonomous vehicles
Values for a Post-Pandemic Future
Criminal liability for the misuse and crimes committed by AI
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
A willingness to be vulnerable
Military robots should not look like a humans
No wheel but a dial
The Relativistic Car
Correctness and Completeness of Programming Instructions for Traffic Circulation
A neo-aristotelian perspective on the need for artificial moral agents (AMAs)
Is tomorrow’s car appealing today? Ethical issues and user attitudes beyond automation
Making moral machines
How virtue signalling makes us better
Safety requirements vs. crashing ethically
Why Not Road Ethics
Automated Vehicle Regulation Needs to Speak to Code, not to Humans
Experimental Philosophy of Technology
Technology as Driver for Morally Motivated Conceptual Engineering
Collective Responsibility and Artificial Intelligence
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
Navigating the social dilemma of autonomous systems
Of trolleys and self-driving cars
The risks of autonomous machines
Ethical machine decisions and the input-selection problem
The Trolley Problem in the Ethics of Autonomous Vehicles
Teaching & Learning Guide for
The Trolley Problem Mysteries
Moral Machines
Character as Moral Fiction
Rational Behaviour and Bargaining Equilibrium in Games and Social Situations
The Ethics of Accident-Algorithms for Self-Driving Cars
A Theory of Justice
The rise of the robots and the crisis of moral patiency
Our Bodies in the Trolley's Path, or Why Self-driving Cars Must *Not* Be Programmed to Kill
| Citations per year | 3.63 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2018 - 2026 (9) |
| Highly cited | No |