Just war and robots’ killings

Philosophical Quarterly 66 (263):302-22 (2016)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
May lethal autonomous weapons systems—‘killer robots ’—be used in war? The majority of writers argue against their use, and those who have argued in favour have done so on a consequentialist basis. We defend the moral permissibility of killer robots, but on the basis of the non-aggregative structure of right assumed by Just War theory. This is necessary because the most important argument against killer robots, the responsibility trilemma proposed by Rob Sparrow, makes the same assumptions. We show that the crucial moral question is not one of responsibility. Rather, it is whether the technology can satisfy the requirements of fairness in the re-distribution of risk. Not only is this possible in principle, but some killer robots will actually satisfy these requirements. An implication of our argument is that there is a public responsibility to regulate killer robots ’ design and manufacture
Reprint years
2016
PhilPapers/Archive ID
SIMJWA
Upload history
First archival date: 2015-11-21
Latest version: 3 (2017-11-05)
View other versions
Added to PP index
2015-09-01

Total views
1,006 ( #4,635 of 2,448,722 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
63 ( #9,629 of 2,448,722 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.