A moral debate about driving

People see self-driving cars, but are there ethical problems to be discussed before they are standard on the road? With the end of less than two months away, technology news has been full of articles talking about the future of driving and the rise of self-driving cars.

A moral debate about driving

Having just returned from Rio, one can only agree. One of us was staying with an eminent professor of philosophy. We were returning to her house with her 11 year old daughter, only to have our way blocked by police with machine guns. They were hunting a drug lord in the local favela — this road was the only escape route and they were preparing for possible altercation.

Cardoso highlights the practical failure of a zero-tolerance approach. A zero tolerance approach to a crime like taking drugs must always fail, in the same way as a zero-tolerance approach to alcohol, prostitution or drugs in sport will always fail.

Paradoxically, the worst thing you could do to the drug lords in Rio is not to wage a war on them, but to decriminalise cocaine and marijuana. They would be out of business in one day.

Supplies could be monitored, controlled and regulated — the harm to users and third parties significantly reduced. The argument is nearly always put forward in terms of the burdens that the drug war has imposed on us in terms of crime and public health.

But we so rarely hear a moral argument in favour of liberalizing drug laws. This is a mistake. Although experts have told us time and time again that things would be better without the drug war, politicians have ignored the expert advice because voters do not want drugs laws to be loosened.

And voters feel this way not because they think they know better than the experts, but because they have moral objections to drug use. There is a hidden moral debate driving the war on drugs that we never seem to bring out in the open.

A moral debate about driving

The original drug prohibitions had a moral rationale rather than a practical one. It began with the American prohibition of opium, which was primarily motivated by a moral objection to white people smoking in Chinese-run opium dens.

This began a prohibition movement in the United States.

Self-Driving Cars: The Ethical Debate

Inmarijuana —which was used almost exclusively by Mexican and Indian immigrants — was prohibited for the first time by the state of California. The drug does not have to be harmful in any other sense. According to US government statistics, paracetamol acetaminophen is involved in nearly five times as many emergency room visits as MDMA, and it remains available in supermarkets around the world.

Suspend for a moment the true belief that alcohol and caffeine are addictive. Addiction does harm the addict, to be sure.As self-driving cars become more advanced, auto makers may have to answer centuries-old philosophical debates -- and they're starting to realize it.

A platform for public participation in and discussion of the human perspective on machine-made moral decisions. Oct 22,  · Self-driving cars are already cruising the streets. But before they can become widespread, carmakers must solve an impossible ethical dilemma of Author: Emerging Technology From The Arxiv.

The Ethical Debate Surrounding Self-Driving Cars. but the moral and ethical questions that come with creating a driverless car. Never miss a story from Becoming Human: Artificial Intelligence Magazine. Get updates Get updates.

Facing the Uncomfortable Realities of Ethics

Search National Review. Search Text offers a fuller picture of the moral vision driving today’s pro-life movement and creates a stark contrast In .

A s self-driving cars move from fiction to reality, a philosophical problem has become the focus of fierce debate among technologists across the ashio-midori.com to the people actually making self.

What Moral Code Should Your Self-driving Car Follow? - Dell Technologies