Video game ‘amoralists’ argue killing in gaming isn’t harmful since no living being is actually hurt. But when it comes to hurting virtual animals, we disagree.
The US military can exempt from service those who are religiously or morally opposed to violence. But conscientious objector status won’t help soldiers who disagree with specific lawful orders.
Can we really expect vehicles to make the moral decisions we can’t?
Holding authors responsible functions as part of academic quality control – without it we cannot hold authors accountable for shoddy research or the moral consequences of their publications.
A new study provides fascinating data on how people prioritise who to save in hypothetical driverless car crashes. But it takes more than just numbers to really create ethical machines.
Ethical decisions deliver less emotional impact when presented in a second language, study finds.
Although they think it’s ‘more moral,’ most people would not buy a driverless car programmed to make choices for the greater good.
The trolley dilemma is a staple of philosophy because it probes our intuitions about whether it’s permissible to kill one person to save many more.
Should we allow innocents to be harmed for the greater good? Eye in the Sky puts a modern spin on a classic philosophical moral dilemma.
There’s no single region in the brain responsible for all moral decision making. But neuroscience research has shown specific brain regions are involved when we’re faced with moral dilemmas.