|
|
|
|
|
by thisGuysAccount
4239 days ago
|
|
Right, in the case of the roomba and the vending machine, the human decision is 'turn on the roomba' and 'push the vending machine button' The assumption of the roomba creator is that 'anything on the floor can be vacuumed, living or otherwise.' The moral choice, with regards to the life impacted by the roomba, is to disregard the potential value of the life. It's all debris. The assumption with the vending machine is similar. The only value considered by the creator is in the transaction involving the operator's money and producing the material the operator wants. Anything else is considered without moral value. Morality can be as much about the lack of value placed on something as it is about the value placed on something. I'm talking about moral agency, the implications of operating a device, and not about how a robot "feels" about doing something, for the lack of more accurate word. |
|