Ethical Arguments Against Autonomous Weapons

907 Words2 Pages

An autonomous weapon system is a weapon that selects and applies force to targets without human intervention. It is capable of causing harm and destruction without the involvement of humans. The system uses preprogrammed algorithms and artificial intelligence systems to analyze data and find its targets. Despite the fact that humans set off the weapons, they don't know which target they are going to hit. These autonomous systems raise many ethical concerns, as well as the possibility of unintended consequences. Since there is no direct human contact with autonomous weapon systems, Sparrow's "responsibility gap" argument explains why autonomous weapon systems pose a moral dilemma. When there is no human oversight, there is a "grey area" around …show more content…

This essay argues that David Boonin's criticism of Robert Sparrow's "responsibility gap" argument is ineffective in light of the ethical concerns surrounding autonomous weapon systems (AWS). By suggesting that autonomous systems cannot be ethically evaluated or that morally recognizable humans do not have to engage in combat, Boonin's critique of Sparrow's argument raises doubt on a crucial idea. Boonin disagrees because he has a different ethical framework and wants to discuss the moral ramifications of AWS adoption in more detail. However, Boonin's critique does not go far enough in addressing the underlying problems that result from using AWS. by downplaying how important moral responsibility and moral principles are in combat. His reasoning ignores the greater societal consequences of sacrificing moral obligation in armed combat, like an increase in civilian deaths and a deterioration of moral standards. Although Boonin adds something to the ethical discussion around AWS, his criticism is ultimately lacking in offering a strong rebuttal of Sparrow's

Open Document