Decker

Michael Decker.  Caregiving robots and ethical reflection.

1. Technical replaceability, p.316 – Decker argues that the autonomous floor-cleaning vacuum cleaner robots will only be used if it is technically as good as the conventional solution (which means, same or better level of cleanliness, coverage, and other such measures).  But, the Roomba was successful initially without achieving the standards of conventional vacuum cleaning solutions. Is Decker simply wrong, or is there a way to interpret this consistenly? Explain.

2. Decker suggests and demonstrates how an ethical concept- in this case Kant’s formula of humanity- can be applied to yield some conclusions about the role of robots, ethically, in the sphere of human caregiving.  Explain how the ethical inadmissibility of instrumentalisation (via Kant’s formula of humanity) suggests that caregiving robots must not diminish the autonomy of the cared-for humans.

3. On page 323 Decker suggests that individual patients should have the right to decide whether and how they want robot care. On page 324 he suggests that robots should be largely rejected from performing human caregiving functions.  Do you agree or disagree with these two conclusions? Address them one at a time, and justify your position precisely.