IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/9kja8.html

A Case for `Killer Robots': Why in the Long Run Martial AI May Be Good for Peace

Author

Listed:
  • Arandjelović, Ognjen

Abstract

Purpose: The remarkable increase of sophistication of artificial intelligence in recent years has already led to its widespread use in martial applications, the potential of so-called ‘killer robots’ ceasing to be a subject of fiction. Approach: Virtually without exception, this potential has generated fear, as evidenced by a mounting number of academic articles calling for the ban on the development and deployment of lethal autonomous robots (LARs). In the present paper I start with an analysis of the existing ethical objections to LARs. Findings: My analysis shows the contemporary thought to be deficient in philosophical rigour, these deficiencies leading to an alternative thesis. Value: I advance a thesis that LARs can in fact be a force for peace, leading to fewer and less deadly wars.

Suggested Citation

  • Arandjelović, Ognjen, 2023. "A Case for `Killer Robots': Why in the Long Run Martial AI May Be Good for Peace," SocArXiv 9kja8, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:9kja8
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/9kja8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/641b0a72e25636160a231e67/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/9kja8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carpenter, Jeffrey P., 2007. "The demand for punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 522-542, April.
    2. CHEUNG, Tai Ming & ANDERSON, Eric & YANG, Fan, 2017. "Chinese Defense Industry Reforms and Their Implications for US-China Military Technological Competition," Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Working Paper Series qt84v3d66k, Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California.
    3. Vicente-Saez, Ruben & Martinez-Fuentes, Clara, 2018. "Open Science now: A systematic literature review for an integrated definition," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 428-436.
    4. Downs, George W & Jones, Michael A, 2002. "Reputation, Compliance, and International Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(1), pages 95-114, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:osf:socarx:9kja8_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Makowsky, Michael D. & Wang, Siyu, 2018. "Embezzlement, whistleblowing, and organizational architecture: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 58-75.
    3. Christine Clavien & Colby J Tanner & Fabrice Clément & Michel Chapuisat, 2012. "Choosy Moral Punishers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-6, June.
    4. Elena Cettolin & Arno Riedl, 2011. "Partial Coercion, Conditional Cooperation, and Self-Commitment in Voluntary Contributions to Public Goods," CESifo Working Paper Series 3556, CESifo.
    5. de Melo, Gioia & Piaggio, Matías, 2015. "The perils of peer punishment: Evidence from a common pool resource framed field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 376-393.
    6. David Masclet & Charles N. Noussair & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2013. "Threat And Punishment In Public Good Experiments," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 51(2), pages 1421-1441, April.
    7. Turcan Nelly & Rusu Andrei & Cujba Rodica, 2019. "Study on the Mapping of Research Data in the Republic of Moldova in the Context of Open Science," International Journal of Advanced Statistics and IT&C for Economics and Life Sciences, Sciendo, vol. 9(1), pages 11-22, June.
    8. Michalis Drouvelis & Julian C. Jamison, 2015. "Selecting public goods institutions: Who likes to punish and reward?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(2), pages 501-534, October.
    9. Englmaier, Florian & Segal, Carmit, 2016. "Morale, Relationships, and Wages: An Experimental Study," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145662, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    10. Marcel Knöchelmann, 2019. "Open Science in the Humanities, or: Open Humanities?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-17, November.
    11. Nikos Nikiforakis, 2004. "Punishment and Counter-punishment in Public Goods Games: Can we still govern ourselves?," Royal Holloway, University of London: Discussion Papers in Economics 04/05, Department of Economics, Royal Holloway University of London, revised Apr 2004.
    12. Manuel Muñoz-Herrera & Nikos Nikiforakis, 2023. "Experimental evidence shows that ulterior motive attribution drives counter-punishment," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 193-206, December.
    13. Chaudhuri, Ananish & Cruickshank, Amy & Sbai, Erwann, 2015. "Gender differences in personnel management: Some experimental evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 20-32.
    14. Leibbrandt, Andreas & López-Pérez, Raúl & Spiegelman, Eli, 2023. "Reciprocal, but inequality averse as well? Mixed motives for punishment and reward," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 91-116.
    15. Jasper Krommendijk, 2015. "The domestic effectiveness of international human rights monitoring in established democracies. The case of the UN human rights treaty bodies," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 489-512, December.
    16. Ramalingam, Abhijit & Godoy, Sara & Morales, Antonio J. & Walker, James M., 2016. "An individualistic approach to institution formation in public good games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 18-36.
    17. Jeffrey Carpenter & Peter Matthews, 2009. "What norms trigger punishment?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(3), pages 272-288, September.
    18. Choi, Jung-Kyoo & Ahn, T.K., 2013. "Strategic reward and altruistic punishment support cooperation in a public goods game experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 17-30.
    19. Boosey, Luke & Mark Isaac, R., 2016. "Asymmetric network monitoring and punishment in public goods experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 132(PA), pages 26-41.
    20. Margarida Rodrigues & Cidália Oliveira & MárioFranco & Ana Daniel, 2024. "A Bibliometric Study About the Rural Creative Class: Proposal of a Conceptual Framework and Future Agenda," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 15278-15303, September.
    21. Patel, Amrish & Cartwright, Edward & Mark, Van Vugt, 2010. "Punishment Cannot Sustain Cooperation in a Public Good Game with Free-Rider Anonymity," Working Papers in Economics 451, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:9kja8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.