Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 10 No. 34 (2024)
Cuestiones de Filosofía

ARTICLES

The Principle of Alternative Possibilities: An Ethical Research Framework for Human Sexual Interactions with Robots

https://doi.org/10.19053/uptc.01235095.v10.n34.2024.17589

Published 2024-07-10

Adrià Harillo
University of São Paulo (UNESP), Brazil

Abstract

In this article, I present three scenarios regarding human sexual interactions with robots. I approach them by considering the development, distribution, and engagement with these technologies. These three scenarios, show different levels of advancements, potential stereotypes, and ethical dilemmas, clarifying the wide spectrum of expectations, principles, and social outcomes intertwined with sexual robotics. Underscoring the significance of individual decision-making in this domain, in this article I advocate for the Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP) as a relevant framework for understanding and assessing the moral implications of these choices. Due to this fact, I consider PAP to be a valid research framework for sexual robotics, since it respects the diversity of choices, upholds the moral agency of social agents, and addresses the ethical responsibilities inherent in decision-making processes. It is important to clarify, at the same time, that this article is conceptual and pre-experimental.

Keywords

ethical considerations, Principle of Alternative Possibilities (PAP), robotics, sexual technology, social responsibility

PDF (Español) XML (Español) HTML (Español)

References

  1. Akova, F. (2023). Artificially sentient beings: Moral, political, and legal issues. New Techno Humanities, 3 (1), pp. 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techum.2023.04.001
  2. Azcarate, P. M., Zhang, A. J., Keyhani, S., Steigerwald, S., Ishida, J. H., and Cohen, B. E. (2020). Medical Reasons for Marijuana Use, Forms of Use, and Patient Perception of Physician Attitudes Among the US Population. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 35 (7), pp. 1979-1986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-020-05800-7
  3. Bartneck, C., Belpaeme, T., Eyssel, F., Kanda, T., Keijsers, M., and Šabanović, S. (2020). Human-Robot Interaction: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108676649
  4. Brandon, M., Shlykova, N., and Morgentaler, A. (2022). Curiosity and other attitudes towards sex robots: Results of an online survey. Journal of Future Robot Life, 3 (1), pp. 3-16. https://doi.org/10.3233/FRL-200017
  5. Breazeal, C. (2004). Designing Sociable Robots. Cambridge / London: The MIT Press.
  6. Cox-George, C. and Bewley, S. (2018). I, Sex Robot: The health implications of the sex robot industry. BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health, 44 (3), pp. 161-164. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2017-200012
  7. Danaher, J. (2017). Robotic Rape and Robotic Child Sexual Abuse: Should They be Criminalised? Criminal Law and Philosophy, 11 (1), pp. 71-95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11572-014-9362-x
  8. Danaher, J. and McArthur, N. (2018). Robot Sex. Social and Ethical Implications. Cambridge / London: MIT Press.
  9. Danaher, J. (2019). Regulating Child Sex Robots: Restriction or Experimentation? Medical Law Review, 27 (4), pp. 553-575. https://doi.org/10.1093/medlaw/fwz002
  10. Devlin, K. (2018). Turned On: Science, Sex and Robots. London: Bloomsbury.
  11. Donnerstein, E. (1980). Pornography and Violence Against Women: Experimental Studies. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 347, pp. 277-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1980.tb21278.x
  12. Donnerstein, E. (1984). Pornography: Its Effect on Violence against Women. N. M. Malamuth and E. Donnerstein (Eds.), Pornography and Sexual Aggression (pp. 53-81). Orlando: Academic Press. https://doi. org/10.1016/B978-0-12-466280-3.50009-9
  13. Eichenberg, C., Khamis, M. and Hübner, L. (2019). The Attitudes of Therapists and Physicians on the Use of Sex Robots in Sexual Therapy: Online Survey and Interview Study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21 (8), e13853. https://doi.org/10.2196/13853
  14. Folkmann, M. N. (2010). Evaluating Aesthetics in Design: A Phenomenological Approach. Design Issues, 26 (1), pp. 40-53. https://doi.org/10.1162/desi.2010.26.1.40
  15. Fosch-Villaronga, E., and Poulsen, A. (2020). Sex care robots: Exploring the potential use of sexual robot technologies for disabled and elder care. Paladyn, Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 11 (1), pp. 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjbr-2020-0001
  16. Fosch-Villaronga, E. and Poulsen, A. (2021). Sex Robots in Care: Setting the Stage for a Discussion on the Potential Use of Sexual Robot Technologies for Persons with Disabilities. ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, March 8–11, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1145/3434074.3446907
  17. Frank, L., and Nyholm, S. (2017). Robot sex and consent: Is consent to sex between a robot and a human conceivable, possible, and desirable? Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25 (3), pp. 305-323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-017-9212-y
  18. Gerdes, A. (2016). The issue of moral consideration in robot ethics. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 45 (3), pp. 274-279. https://doi.
  19. org/10.1145/2874239.2874278
  20. Goldsmith, K., Dunkley, C. R., Dang, S. S. and Gorzalka, B. B. (2017). Pornography consumption and its association with sexual concerns and expectations among young men and women. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 26 (2), pp. 151-162. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.262-a2
  21. Islam, T., Islam, R., Pitafi, A. H., Xiaobei, L., Rehmani, M., Irfan, M. and Mubarak, M. S. (2021). The impact of corporate social responsibility on customer loyalty: The mediating role of corporate reputation, customer satisfaction, and trust. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 25, pp. 123-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.07.019
  22. Jackson, D. (2018). Profitability, Mechanization and Economies of Scale. London: Routledge.
  23. Kubes, T. (2019). New Materialist Perspectives on Sex Robots. A Feminist Dystopia/Utopia? Social Sciences, 8 (8), https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8080224
  24. Kuiper. (2014). R.U.R.: Rossum’s Universal Robots. Encyclopedia Britannica. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/RUR
  25. Lancaster, K. (2021). Non-consensual personified sexbots: An intrinsic wrong. Ethics and Information Technology, 23 (4), pp. 589-600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-021-09597-9
  26. Lawson, C. (2017). Technology and Isolation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Levy, D. (2007). Love and Sex with Robots: The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships. New York: Harper Collins.
  28. McKee, A., Litsou, K., Byron, P. and Ingham, R. (2021). The relationship between consumption of pornography and consensual sexual practice: Results of a mixed method systematic review. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 30 (3), pp. 387-396. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjhs.2021-0010
  29. Mohajan, H. K. (2022). An Overview on the Feminism and Its Categories. Research and Advances in Education, 1 (3), pp. 11-26. https://doi.org/10.56397/RAE.2022.09.02
  30. Muncan, B., Walters, S. M., Ezell, J. and Ompad, D. C. (2020). “They look at us like junkies”: Influences of drug use stigma on the healthcare engagement of people who inject drugs in New York City. Harm Reduction Journal, 17 (53). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12954-020-00399-8
  31. Nyholm, S. (2020). Humans and Robots: Ethics, Agency, and Anthropomorphism. London: Rowman & Littlefield.
  32. Nyholm, S. (2022). The Ethics of Humanoid Sex Robots. B. D. Earp, C. Chambers and L. Watson (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Sex and Sexuality (pp. 574-585). London: Routledge.
  33. Nyholm, S. and Frank, L. (2018). From sex robots to love robots: Is mutual love with a robot possible? J. Danaher and N. McArthur (Eds.), Robot sex: Social and ethical implications. MIT Press. https://philpapers.org/rec/NYHFSR
  34. Oleksy, T. and Wnuk, A. (2021). Do women perceive sex robots as threatening? The role of political views and presenting the robot as a female-vs male-friendly product. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, 106664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106664
  35. Peeters, A. and Haselager, P. (2021). Designing Virtuous Sex Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13 (1), pp. 55-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00592-1
  36. Regehr, C. and Glancy, G. (2001). Empathy and Its Influence on Sexual Misconduct. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2 (2), pp. 142-154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838001002002003
  37. Richardson, K. (2015). The Asymmetrical ‘Relationship’- Parallels Between Prostitution and the Development of Sex Robots. SIGCAS Computers & Society, 45 (3), pp. 290-293. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2874239.2874281
  38. Robb, D. (2020). Moral Responsibility and the Principle of Alternative Possibilities. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford
  39. University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2023/entries/alternative-possibilities/
  40. Sparrow, R. (2017). Robots, Rape, and Representation. International Journal of Social Robotics, 9 (4), pp. 465-477. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-017-0413-z
  41. Sterri, A. B. and Earp, B. (2021). The ethics of sex robots. C. Véliz (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Digital Ethics (pp. 241-257). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198857815.013.13
  42. Strikwerda, L. (2017). Legal and Moral Implications of Child Sex Robots. J. Danaher and N. McArthur (Eds.), Robot Sex: Social and Ethical Implications (pp. 133-152). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262036689.003.0008

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.