Many systems of military robotic have been deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq. These robots include the remote-controlled PackBot system, which enables one to detect and detonate IED (improvised explosive devices), and the Talon SWORDS, another remote-controlled robot deployed in the second Iraq war, which can be equipped with machine guns and grenade launchers.
The truth-conditions of this allegedly apodictic conclusion are rather obscure, pending an answer to the following questions:
1. What is a soldier of robot? Does a robotic system controlled by remote, such as the Talon SWORDS, qualify as a robot soldier?
2. What does a robot soldier to do the job better than a human soldier? Which behavioral features can be used sensibly as a basis to compare and rank the performances of robot soldiers and human soldiers?
In connection with No 1, one should be careful to note that a Talon SWORDS robot is a remote-controlled system, and therefore all firing decisions are taken by its human controller. If one requires that soldier are capable of taking autonomous firing decisions, then no remote-controlled robot qualifies as a robotic soldier.
In connection with No 2, it is taken for granted here that a “good” soldier, whatever it is, must behave in the battlefield in accordance with international humanitarian law, including internationally recognized treaties such as the Geneva and the Hague Conventions, in addition to the “code of ethics”, if any, and the rules of engagement adopted by its own army. This broad requirement suggests that ethical reflection is needed to understand what it takes to be a good robotic soldier, and which behavioral tests must be passed to qualify as a good robotic soldier.
Some researchers suggested that intelligent robots which are autonomous in their firing decisions – that is, robots that are not controlled by external agents as far as firing decisions are concerned – will eventually behave “more ethically” than human soldiers in the battlefield.
No comments:
Post a Comment