ROBOTIC PERSONS

1

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

Evangelical scholarship is behind in addressing the existential and anthropological risks of current trends in robotics and artificial intelligence (AI). There are three waves of robotic futurism (hereafter RF), and each contributes to current fields of research into developing AI-driven robots, which are primarily focused on three industries: labor replacements, automated war, and sex/companionship. Evangelicals’ ontological and metaphysical assumptions about humanness and personhood, via the imago Dei (“image of God”), currently hinder their engagement with current ethical and philosophical trends surrounding AI-driven robots. A critical evangelical assessment of personhood in the realm of AI-driven robotics is needed to address the forthcoming anthropological crisis, as none currently exists. This book will argue that granting qualified AI-driven robots with legal personhood (i.e., legal rights, responsibility, and accountability) will serve as a bulwark against dehumanization of (i.e., value and dignity) of humans. The closer potential AI-driven robots come in proximity to the identity of humans, the further the image of God in humans is distorted.

Can AI-driven robots be considered persons with equal dignity and responsibility like humans who are endowed with such because of being created in the imago Dei? The evangelical answer is simply, no: only humans created by God are endowed with natural rights. Yet robotic rights (i.e., legal personhood) warrant deep consideration by the evangelical community.

In April 2019, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission (ERLC) published “Artificial Intelligence: Evangelical Statement of Principles,” the first published evangelical address of forthcoming AI. The ERLC’s publication on AI brings to light a much-needed discussion on the use of technology, especially AI-driven technology, and the requirements of the local church to speak into the potential benefits and harms of future tech. The ERLC’s statement gives an evangelical framework to discuss AI and robotics; however, the ERLC needs pastors, Christian philosophers, and theologians to give critical assessment and insight into the ethical, moral, and anthropological problems that coincide with forthcoming technological developments.

Why is there no publication or critical assessment on AI-driven robots or AI until 2019? The assumption among evangelicals is that the need to address futuristic robotics from the perspective of virtue or deontological ethics is irrelevant for current anthropological consideration. A general assumption in evangelicalism is that the technology in quantum computing is so far beyond the horizon that one does not need to address the issue of personhood. This logic is problematic, for there is no consistent way to ascertain the probability of forthcoming technology within a set timeframe. As Nick Bostrom warns in Superintelligence, to reduce the existential risks of forthcoming AI and superintelligence, the human race must stop focusing on timelines of development and instead concentrate on strategic analysis across multiple academic disciplines for the betterment of humanity.

Bostrom’s work ought to alarm evangelicals and suggest a need for critical engagement in the discussion on ethical and civil risks concerning robotic personhood. As the pace of innovation accelerates in AI and robotics, there is little room for the consideration of potential risk for human harm. Although it is impossible to know when this technology will come about, it would be irresponsible to neglect planning for the existential and anthropological risks that will certainly follow technological developments.

While many evangelicals dismiss the thought of granting robots personhood, discussions about granting legal personhood to qualified robotics began in 2014 during European Parliament preliminary sessions (EU). The EU’s document is preliminary; however, it shows foresight concerning the possibility of moral and ethical responsibility in the emergence of AI and robotic technology. The ethical and social implications of creating robots to replace human work and interaction in the name of innovation and creativity are at best dangerous. Human history shows that what was created for good can also be used for evil.