Cargando…

Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity

Much of the literature concerning the ethics of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) has focused on the idea of human dignity. The lion's share of that literature has been devoted to arguing that the use of LAWS is inconsistent with human dignity, so their use should be prohibited. Call thi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Kahn, Leonard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36156937
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2022.999293
_version_ 1784795165864493056
author Kahn, Leonard
author_facet Kahn, Leonard
author_sort Kahn, Leonard
collection PubMed
description Much of the literature concerning the ethics of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) has focused on the idea of human dignity. The lion's share of that literature has been devoted to arguing that the use of LAWS is inconsistent with human dignity, so their use should be prohibited. Call this position “Prohibitionism.” Prohibitionists face several major obstacles. First, the concept of human dignity is itself a source of contention and difficult to operationalize. Second, Prohibitionists have struggled to form a consensus about a property P such that (i) all and only instances of LAWS have P and (ii) P is always inconsistent with human dignity. Third, an absolute ban on the use of LAWS seems implausible when they can be used on a limited basis for a good cause. Nevertheless, my main purpose here is to outline an alternative to Prohibitionism and recognize some of its advantages. This alternative, which I will call “Restrictionism,” recognizes the basic intuition at the heart of Prohibitionism - namely, that the use of LAWS raises a concern about human dignity. Moreover, it understands this concern to be rooted in the idea that LAWS can make determinations without human involvement about whom to target for lethal action. However, Restrictionism differs from Prohibitionism in several ways. First, it stipulates a basic standard for respecting human dignity. This basic standard is met by an action in a just war if and only if the action conforms with the following requirements: (i) the action is militarily necessary, (ii) the action involves a distinction between combatants and non-combatants, (iii) noncombatants are not targeted for harm, and (iv) any and all incidental harm to non-combatants is minimized. In short, the use of LAWS meets the standard of basic respect for human dignity if and only if it acts in a way that is functionally isomorphic with how a responsible combatant would act. This approach leaves open the question of whether and under what conditions LAWS can meet the standard of basic respect for human dignity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9500208
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95002082022-09-24 Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity Kahn, Leonard Front Big Data Big Data Much of the literature concerning the ethics of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) has focused on the idea of human dignity. The lion's share of that literature has been devoted to arguing that the use of LAWS is inconsistent with human dignity, so their use should be prohibited. Call this position “Prohibitionism.” Prohibitionists face several major obstacles. First, the concept of human dignity is itself a source of contention and difficult to operationalize. Second, Prohibitionists have struggled to form a consensus about a property P such that (i) all and only instances of LAWS have P and (ii) P is always inconsistent with human dignity. Third, an absolute ban on the use of LAWS seems implausible when they can be used on a limited basis for a good cause. Nevertheless, my main purpose here is to outline an alternative to Prohibitionism and recognize some of its advantages. This alternative, which I will call “Restrictionism,” recognizes the basic intuition at the heart of Prohibitionism - namely, that the use of LAWS raises a concern about human dignity. Moreover, it understands this concern to be rooted in the idea that LAWS can make determinations without human involvement about whom to target for lethal action. However, Restrictionism differs from Prohibitionism in several ways. First, it stipulates a basic standard for respecting human dignity. This basic standard is met by an action in a just war if and only if the action conforms with the following requirements: (i) the action is militarily necessary, (ii) the action involves a distinction between combatants and non-combatants, (iii) noncombatants are not targeted for harm, and (iv) any and all incidental harm to non-combatants is minimized. In short, the use of LAWS meets the standard of basic respect for human dignity if and only if it acts in a way that is functionally isomorphic with how a responsible combatant would act. This approach leaves open the question of whether and under what conditions LAWS can meet the standard of basic respect for human dignity. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9500208/ /pubmed/36156937 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2022.999293 Text en Copyright © 2022 Kahn. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Big Data
Kahn, Leonard
Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
title Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
title_full Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
title_fullStr Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
title_full_unstemmed Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
title_short Lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
title_sort lethal autonomous weapon systems and respect for human dignity
topic Big Data
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9500208/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36156937
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fdata.2022.999293
work_keys_str_mv AT kahnleonard lethalautonomousweaponsystemsandrespectforhumandignity