Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio

Vol. 10 Núm. 34 (2024)
Cuestiones de Filosofía

ARTICULOS

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

Publicado 10-07-2024

Adrià Harillo Pla
Universidad del Estado de São Paulo (UNESP), Brasil

Resumen

En este artículo, presento tres escenarios relacionados con las interacciones sexuales humanas con robots. Me acerco a ellos considerando el desarrollo, la distribución y el compromiso con estas tecnologías. Estos tres escenarios muestran diferentes niveles de avances, posibles estereotipos y dilemas éticos, aclarando el amplio espectro de expectativas, principios y resultados sociales entrelazados con la robótica sexual. Subrayando la importancia de la toma de decisiones individuales en este ámbito, en este artículo defiendo el Principio de Posibilidades Alternativas (PAP) como un marco relevante para comprender y evaluar las implicaciones morales de estas elecciones. Debido a este hecho, considero que el PAP es un marco de investigación válido para la robótica sexual, ya que respeta la diversidad de opciones, defiende la agencia moral de los agentes sociales y aborda las responsabilidades éticas inherentes a los procesos de toma de decisiones. Es importante aclarar, al mismo tiempo, que este artículo es conceptual y preexperimental.

Palabras clave

consideraciones éticas, Principio de Posibilidades Alternativas (PAP), robótica, tecnología sexual, responsabilidad social

PDF XML HTML

Citas

  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

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Artículos similares

1 2 3 > >> 

También puede {advancedSearchLink} para este artículo.