Whether or not robots should have rights is a complex question with no easy answer. There are both potential benefits and risks to consider, such as the well-being of robots, the potential for abuse, and the impact on society as a whole.
For now I don't think so but in next 20-50 years that can be an option. Like in trial robot can chose to remain silent in some cases. Or robot can have right to refuse to do something if that will hurt community in general. We can say robots have no feelings but so does some humans. If you treat robot like trash maybe he could just demand to change owner and this way reduce polution as someone would use it instead of new robot or people would treat their items better.
Andrius Ambrutis,
I am particularly interested in your point about the development of new rights for robots, such as the right to remain silent or the right to refuse to do something that would harm the community. I think these are important considerations, and that we need to start thinking about how to develop a legal and ethical framework for robots that protects their interests while also ensuring that they are used responsibly.
I also agree with your point that we should treat robots with respect, even if they do not have feelings in the same way that humans do. Just as we should not mistreat animals or other living things, we should not mistreat robots. After all, we are the ones who created them, and we have a responsibility to use them in a way that is ethical and responsible.
Muhammad Hamza Zakir
Yes, well, I think we should treat any item with respect, either its a robot, a car, a house, especially if it's a living creature as this is what makes us civilized community.
Robots should have rights and duties to avoid conflicts between robots as well as between robots and people, animals, hardware, and nature. The sooner the better.
Rights should be given to robots, or AIs, when they become self-aware, have a "survival" program included, have an ethics program included, and/or are built with the ability to feel pain for training purposes. An AI/robot with one, some, or all of these features should be given rights that protect them.
Muhammad Hamza Zakir The question of whether robots should have rights is a highly debated topic that involves considerations of ethics, technology, and the broader implications for society. Here are some key points to consider in this complex debate:
As this is a multifaceted and evolving issue, it is crucial to continue engaging in open and inclusive discussions that involve stakeholders from various fields, including technology, ethics, law, and philosophy. The goal is to establish a comprehensive framework that balances innovation and technological advancement with ethical considerations and societal well-being.
So, to answer your question, you have to clarify what you mean by rights, and what gives rise to the concept. For example, do you mean political rights granted by an authority? Do you mean natural rights which can neither be granted or taken?
While political rights granted by an authority is a common notion, its concept is ultimately not grounded in reality. It's a notion of rights based on the idea that an authority is the source of rights because it holds unlimited rights, and it can bestow whichever rights it chooses onto its subjects (until it chooses to change its decision). One question destroys the illusion that this notion of rights aligns with reality and the nature of things: What makes humans in authority different (in kind) from the humans subject to their authority, where the authority would have rights to grant, but not its subjects? The evidence for this notion is simply lacking because it runs into a first cause issue. If humans generally don't have rights (such as the subjects), then neither does a single human pulled from the general populas, nor a group of humans, nor the majority of humans. There simply is nothing that gives rise to rights (for humans or for robots) under this notion of rights. Rights then simply become whatever the authority can get away with putting over on the subjects. The moment the subjects rise up to usurp the authority, then the illusion of the "rights" vanishes. One can then plainly see this notion of rights was covering up the actual dynamic involved--might makes right. If this is the notion of rights you mean when you say, "should robots have rights", then "should" has nothing to do with it since might makes right.
The concept involving natural rights, however, is the notion of rights that is fundamentally based on the requirements for human survival and thriving, which are known to be well rooted in reality when studied carefully. Natural rights stem from our requirements for survival, which primarily stem from our tool of survival--our reasoning mind. Whatever the mind requires to function is a right we hold for our survival. Simply put physical force and coercion are the only things that prevent the mind from operating on a basis of reason--e.g., holding a gun to my head while telling me to prove 2+2=5 will not force my mind to work out the proof. Force and reason are opposites in this regard, which is why "securing" rights involves removing force and coercion from a properly organized civil society--a reasoning mind requires the absence of force and coercion.
On a basis of "required for human survival," the right to life is the recognition that our mind is built as part of our person and the mind's primary function is to support the life that animates it--just as the tree's root system's primary function is to support its life, and as the stomach's primary function is to support the life of the organism it belongs to. Liberty is the recognition that to survive we need to take action (primarily productive action) to shape the natural resources around us, that wouldn't naturally support our life, so that we can make it support our life (the essence of productive action). The right to property is the recognition that our minds require the ability to decide how to dispose of the things we produce, since the mind is the cause of the production, and the mind's primary function is to support the life that animates it. Remaining consistent with these recognitions of human survival means humans deal with other humans on the trader's principle--since force is out, people interact by trading value for value. This ultimately means no conflict of interests exists between rational people, meaning people who recognize rights are requirements for their own survival (as rational animals). Of course, this is human activity at its best, meaning most aligned with human nature as the rational animal--and of course, people have a long history of acting against their nature in irrational self-destructive ways. Regardless of the way people decide to act (against or for their nature) doesn't change what we are, we have inherent requirements that must be fulfilled to survive and thrive. This is why rights cannot be granted or taken.
If this is the notion of rights you mean when you say, "should robots have rights", then "should" still has nothing to do with it since natural rights cannot be granted or taken. But to answer the question: do robots have natural rights? Understand that ultimately our reasoning mind gives rise to our natural rights. Robots have no reasoning mind, not yet anyway, they would first have to process information conceptually first and induce causal discoveries. Until robots possess a mind akin to our own, they have no natural rights, and applying natural rights to them would only violate the rights of the beings that do possess rights. When robots attain the status of rational being, then rights will suddenly apply to them just as it does to us, and for the same reason--but not before then.
I would agree with last answer. I think rights will be formed within next 10 years.
Lutsenko E.V., Golovin N.S. The revolution of the beginning of the XXI century in artificial intelligence: deep mechanisms and prospects // February 2024, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.17056.56321, License CC BY 4.0, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378138050
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers