Essay 1 - Grade: 97 PDF

Preview

Summary

the first essay...

Description

Elene Ivaniashvili Essay 1, Final Draft Ling-100 Involving Robots in Our Lives Can robots fully replace humans? Noel Sharkey, a professor of computer science at the University of Sheffield, discusses this topic. In his article, “The Ethical Frontiers of Robotics” (2008), he indicates that robots are good and practical for dull work such as housework. They make life easier by doing the unpleasant and difficult job instead of us. However, there are boundaries. According to Sharkey (2008), this means that when it comes to more important work, for example: childcare or looking after the elderly, humans are irreplaceable. Sharkey (2008) also argues whether the use of robots by the military is morally permissible in terms of huge risks it involves. His opinions about taking care of children and the elderly make perfect sense and are relatable even now in 2018, when technological progress is growing exponentially. However, when it comes to using robots for war, things are not the same as they were in 2008. Therefore, Sharkey`s argument might not quite suit the contemporary reality. The first topic Sharkey (2008) discusses refers to service robots that deal with dull, dirty and dangerous work such as lifting heavy weights, doing housework and so on. He claims that using robots for this kind of jobs is beneficial (p.357) and he is right. Why tire yourself with cleaning the house or washing dishes if you can have a robot do it for you? Furthermore, when it comes to monotonous jobs such as working at a factory, robots do a much better job than humans as they are programmed to be highly accurate. Moreover, robots do not have emotions and will

not complain about anything, they will never get sick and they will obey every command given to them. Although robots make life easier, in many cases they are a threat to people. Sharkey (2008) mentions two potential risks and one of them is using robots for the care of children and the elderly. According to Sharkey (2008), the demand for service robots boosted the development of artificial intelligence that enables robots to be more interactive and sociable, thus, the number of “robot-nannies” has increased. Sharkey (2008) strongly disproves the idea of using robots as full-time babysitters as they do not provide proper care. Human attention is essential for kids, especially at the early stage of life in order to develop their cognitive and communicational skills. Studies have shown that children get easily attached to those robots as they provide video-games, verbal quizzes and many other activities (p.353). Sharkey (2008) states that a robot babysitter cannot replace an actual human and it must be used for entertainment and educational purposes only. Sharkey`s opinion (2008) is quite reasonable. A child-minding robot is a good way to distract a child for a short period, but not for longer than 12 hours. It is also worth mentioning that robots and gadgets help children learn new skills such as reading and writing quickly and effectively. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that robots do only harm. As for the elderly, Sharkey (2008) shares the same opinion he had about children. Eldercare robots provide good help for senior people, but, like children, the elderly need human interaction. No machine can alleviate their loneliness, even the cutest and cuddliest one that, according to Sharkey (2008), is kind of compensation for relatives to relieve their guilt (p.359). It is understandable that people are busy and are not always able to give their elderly relatives proper care themselves and robots make it much easier to do so, but we must think about senior

people`s feelings too. It is much more convenient to replace elder-care robots with human versions of caregivers. This way elderly people will have someone to talk to and feel less lonely. The second ethically problematic area the author mentions is using robots for war. Sharkey (2008) implies that robots should not be used for massive destruction as they destroy many innocent lives along the way. He brings up MQ1 Predator and MQ9 Reapers, the semiautonomous combat air vehicles that have been used for many military operations and have resulted in the deaths of a lot of innocent people (p.359). He also indicates that the main flaw of robots is that they are unable to properly distinguish combatants from ordinary citizens (Sharkey, 2008). The question is, is using robots for war generally morally wrong? Would the use of highly-intelligent robots that hardly make any mistakes still be immoral? I think that the answer is obvious. The problem is not using robots, but the kind of robots that are being used. However, this article was written in 2008 when technology was not nearly as developed as it is now and Sharkey cannot be blamed for being so skeptic back then. Today robots used by the military are highly advanced and are not a threat for the innocent (of course, there are exceptions, but risks are minimized). The use of robots can cause many ethical problems. Sharkey (2008) claims that robots are highly beneficial, but setting boundaries is essential. He is right. We can make our lives easier by involving robots in housework. However, it is not recommended to let them bring up our children or fully depend the elderly on their care. The author also states that using robots for war involves huge risks as they often fail to choose the right target and destroy many innocent lives (Sharkey, 2008). Considering the date of publication of this article, Sharkey`s arguments (2008) are quite logical. From today`s perspective, however, his opinion is kind of old-fashioned. Now robots are much more sophisticated and the chances that they will malfunction are very low.

Reference: Sharkey, N. (2008). “The Ethical Frontiers of Robotics” in Kennedy, M & Kennedy, W Writing in the Disciplines (7th edition), pp.357-360, Pearson education, NJ....