An enemy’s incidental human detail can stop a soldier from firing
Evidence
This is one of the worries of the authors of a recent report: “By eliminating human involvement in the decision to use lethal force in armed conflict, fully autonomous weapons would undermine other, non-legal protections for civilians. First, robots would not be restrained by human emotions and the capacity for compassion… . Emotionless robots could, therefore, serve as tools of repressive dictators seeking to crack down on their own people without fear their troops would turn on them… . Emotions do not always lead to irrational killing.” — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1135 (
#exemplifies, via linked claim)
Categorization
- XREF: connects to: Human emotions protect civilians by restraining lethal military force — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1135; Proponents conflate firing accuracy with impact extent and target identification
Related
- Human emotions protect civilians by restraining lethal military force (similarity 0.90)
- Empathy discourse is repurposed to legitimize mechanized killing (similarity 0.80)
- Proponents conflate firing accuracy with impact extent and target identification (similarity 0.79)
- Roboticist Ronald Arkin argues lethal robots could be more humane than human soldiers (similarity 0.79)
- Robot soldiers would enable dictators to crush their own populations safely (similarity 0.79)
- Combat indifference to killing spread to accept civilian deaths by mistake (similarity 0.79)
- Refusing to kill is about what one becomes, not what one ought to do (similarity 0.78)
Broader Connections
- Human emotions protect civilians by restraining lethal military force
#exemplifies(0.75) — Grégoire Chamayou, A Theory of the Drone, 1135 - Proponents conflate firing accuracy with impact extent and target identification
#corroborates(0.45)