Can humanoid robots be moral?

Abstract

The concept of morality underpins the moral responsibility that not only depends on the outward practices (or 'output', in the case of humanoid robots) of the agents but on the internal attitudes ('input') that rational and responsible intentioned beings generate. The primary question that has initiated extensive debate, i.e. 'Can humanoid robots be moral?', stems from the normative outlook where morality includes human conscience and socio-linguistic background. This paper advances the thesis that the conceptions of morality and creativity interplay with linguistic human beings instead of non-linguistic humanoid robots, as humanoid robots are indeed docile automata that cannot be responsible for their actions. To eradicate human ethics in order to make way for humanoid robot ethics highlights the moral actions and adequacy that hinges the myth of creative agency and self-dependency, which a humanoid robot can scarcely express.

Post-turing Methodology: Breaking the Wall on the Way to Artificial General Intelligence

“…Creating AI capable of reasoning and communicating like a person is probably not the most potent answer to the Turing's question, "Can machines think?". It is counterproductive to discuss the ethical limitations of precisely humanoid robots [23]. If we evaluate the design of modern robots, then the simplest question -"How many fingers should a manipulator hand have?"…”