Abstract

The question “Can a robot be a person?” has emerged of late in the field of bioethics. The paper addresses the question in dialogue with Emmanuel Levinas. It begins with something like an archeological reconstruction of personhood in modernity, in order to locate the context out of which the question posed, “can a robot be a person?” might take on meaning. Descartes, Hume and Kant are the most important exponents of the story, their position emerging in direct contradiction with the classical metaphysics of the person, such as one finds in Thomas Aquinas. Levinas rejects the rationalist perspective of a bodiless mind, a person reduced to her cognitive capacities, no less than the empirical version of a mindless body, both understandings of personhood being de facto prevalent in contemporary bioethics, especially in the Anglo-American version of it. On the other hand, as Levinas suggests, to be a person is to be “manifested in the exteriority of the face, which is not the disclosure of an impersonal Neuter. If so, a robot cannot be a person. The paper tries to show why this is the case.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.