Weapons Ethics

First, a dilemma

Moral Distance

“the phenomenon of “moral distance” where the institutions that are supposed to help us, such as the law, confront us as an inhuman and alienating force”

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-013-1865-1/fulltext.html

Milgram Experiment

“normal people could be induced to inflict immense cruelty on others if they believed that a scientific authority had taken the responsibility for that action”http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/abn/67/4/371.pdf

Redefining Violence

“What is violence? Violence is killing by machines at a distance.”

Killing is a natural part of life, but only humans use machines to kill.

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/13502-timothy-leary-violence-is-killing-with-machines-at-a-distance

This Slide(S) just for our noteshttp://www.catb.org/~esr/guns/gun-ethics.htmlhttp://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/submitted/reyes/weaponry.html

this writing is atrocious but….HUGELY USEFULhttp://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.stanford.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=36ffbd97-a9ff-4985-b87a-0291a6ed936c%40sessionmgr111&vid=5&hid=114--key player in the history of weapon design: vannevar bush-”one of the credited “fathers” of the Internet, and Director of

the Office for Scientific Research and Development (OSRD) during the Second World War”---The OSRD developed the atom bomb, the proximity fuse and low frequency radar btw-- the article starts out with an overview of the delevopement of the atom bomb and then branches into moral junk-- there are some very useful bullets

defensive weapons such as radar; vs weapons like the atom bomb with the potential to harm non combattants but also the potential to act as a “deterrant”The doctrine of double effect (that foreseen evilresulting from an act can be justified, provided that it wasn’t the principal intention ofthe act) was perhaps inevitably referenced to support the massive targeting of civiliansby allied bombing campaigns during the Second World War.

http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.stanford.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=36ffbd97-a9ff-4985-b87a-0291a6ed936c%40sessionmgr111&vid=5&hid=114http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2010/12/robotics%20ethics%20singer/12_robotics_ethics_singer.pdf

useful linkshttp://www.sgr.org.uk/projects/military-influence-some-useful-websites

value sensitive design case study--- Military design!!! kim gave us this article we should use it!!!! There is a section that specifically covers “whether an engineer can ethically design a weapon” (starts pg 705)

Integrating Ethics in Design through theValue-Sensitive Design Approach-- by Mary L. Cummings

Tomahawk missile is the U.S. Navy’s premier land attack missile, used during the Gulf War in 1991, in Afghanistan in 2001, and most recently in Iraq. It is strategically invaluable since it can be fired approximately 1000 miles from its intended target with pinpoint accuracy. However, one of the primary drawbacks to previous versions of the missile is its “fire and forget” capability: the current operational Tomahawk contains its own internal guidance and navigation system, and once launched, cannot be redirected in-flight.

they are now trying to design the “tactical tomohawk, which will have the ability for in flight redirection

revenge effect- what if this “cushion” makes it easier for people to justify using the tomohawk since launching it would no longer be an irritractable 1.2 million down the drain?-but.. the tomohawk was designed for precision attacks of MILITARY targets--- so this revenge effect would not be too horrible if the missiles were kept to their intended usealso design considerations--”how much automation is needed for such a system and to what degree should humans be in the decision-making loop.” pg 705

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20120928-battle-bots-think-for-themselves

Saffir- humanoid robot built to tackle fires on US navy shipsthere are several defensive “soldier robots” already developed, what about offensive robots which would make it hard to pin guilt to any human for “war crimes”?, but what about the potential of reducing harm to civilians?---> in the long run does not make sense since if everyone started using robot soldiers, how would wars be won if the losses are not human??-- JK “military targets”-- re the laws of war

drone aircraft vs driverless cars?--- paralell technology developements can lead to better military technology in a sort of “revenge effect”

“Is there any legitimacy for horrendous weapons (e.g., the machine gun of Richard Gatling) naïvely intended to force peace through deterrence?”

“Is there a moral implication in the extent to which imposed death is immediate rather than lingering, or (what is perhaps the same thing) painless rather than painful?”