Here is an excellent TED talk by P.W. Singer, author of Wired for War. I'm just fascinated and frightened by all of this. I like Singer's analogy of these robots of war with the atomic bomb. This is the time to think about the moral and ethical issues in the development of these robotic weapons. There needs to be a broader discussion of the implications of robots in war. We also seriously need to update laws regarding the conduct of war. This is not a hypothetical issue. There are increasing number of drone attacks in Pakistan (there was one this morning that killed 13 people). Yes, the Pakistan government has given a silent nod to these (do they have a choice?), but who gets the blame for civilian casualties which accompany almost every strike? In this kind of war, who gets to decide who is a civilian and who is a combatant? All of these questions are aside from assessing the long-term effectiveness of this remote-control war.
The visuals associated with Singer's talk are fascinating. It truly gives an idea of the diversity of weapons being employed. With the level of defense budget here in the US, I shudder to think of the next generation of weapons - the ones that we can't even imagine right now. The last few minutes of the talk touch upon the moral issues - especially on what to do when (not "if") we get to autonomous war machines. He does not provide any answers but others have to address these questions. Then of course, we also have to worry about video-game expert kids flying drones from Nevada that kill people thousands of miles away. Perhaps a perfect time to turn Ender's Game into a movie (related posts: Push-button executions from the skies, and Robots of war). Here is the video (its about 16 minutes long).
What is Irtiqa?
Irtiqa is Salman Hameed's blog. A few years ago (before Facebook killed many of the blogs), it used to track stories of science & religion, especially those related to Muslim societies. That is still one of its foci, but now it dovetails more of Salman's interests including film, astronomy, science fiction, and science outreach in both Pakistan and the US.
Irtiqa literally means evolution in Urdu. But it does not imply only biological evolution. Instead, it is an all encompassing word used for evolution of the universe, biological evolution, and also for biological/human development. While it has created confusion in debates over biological evolution in South Asia, it provides a nice integrative name for this blog. For further information, contact Salman Hameed.
The blog banner is designed by Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad. You can find all his creative endeavors at Orangie.
Salman Hameed
Salman is an astronomer and Associate Professor of Integrated Science & Humanities at Hampshire College, Massachusetts. Currently, he is working on understanding the rise of creationism in contemporary Islamic world and how Muslims view the relationship between science & religion. He is also working with historian Tracy Leavelle at Creighton University to analyze reconciliation efforts between astronomers and Native Hawaiians over telescopes on top of sacred Mauna Kea in Hawaii. He teaches “History and Philosophy of Science & Religion” with philosopher Laura Sizer, and “Science in the Islamic World”, both at Hampshire College. Salman and Laura Sizer are also responsible for the ongoing Hampshire College Lecture Series on Science & Religion, and you can find videos of all these lectures below. Contact information here.
LABELS
- Arab Spring
- art
- Astronomy
- Astronomy Pictures from Pakistan
- atheism
- beliefs of scientists
- Catholic Church and science
- creationism
- education
- education in muslim world
- ethics morality and science
- evolution
- faith and medicine
- film theater and television
- Friday Journal Club
- general
- history
- humor
- intelligent design
- Irtiqa Conversations
- Islam and Modernity
- islam and science
- Islamic Calendar
- islamic creationism
- Judaism and science
- media
- Muslims in Europe
- off topic
- Pakistan
- politics of science and religion
- posts by Nidhal Guessoum
- primates
- pseudoscience
- religion and environmentalism
- Religion and Health
- Religion and Technology
- Saturday Video
- science and Native religions
- science and religion books
- science fiction
- science in muslim world
- science of belief
- science of morality
- science religion and terrorism
- UFO religions
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(325)
-
▼
April
(32)
- Pray that Marianne Williamson never gets published...
- Skeletal remains and the issue of cultural affilia...
- A friendlier atheism
- Swine flu: Is it Halal?
- Turkish Gulen schools under scrutiny in Central Asia
- Off-Topic: No point in talking to the Taliban in Swat
- Poetic take down of superstition from 2000 years ago
- Pushing the limits of our knowledge about origins
- On Madrasas in Singapore
- Should we drop the term "Muslim World"?
- This blog going "Irtiqa"
- Modernity and Religion
- Queen Esther had two tails...
- Video: Philip Kitcher - Religion after Darwin?
- Export and Import of Christianity
- NYU: Darwin and the boundaries of science conference
- God, global warming, and a congressman from Illinois
- New Scientist on the Turkish censorship of Darwin
- Off-Topic: The situation in northern Pakistan
- Oped on Iran's nuclear program
- Commandments and Communication
- Multiverse theory: Leave it to science
- The First Cause?
- Science & Religion in "Knowing"
- International Year of Astronomy in Pakistan
- Flow charting medieval Muslim philosophy
- Off-topic: Pakistan in the hands of Zardari
- BBC documentary: Did Darwin Kill God?
- Webcast of McGill Islam & Evolution Symposium
- Ethics, morality, and legality of robotic wars
- Galileo and Medici exhibit at the Franklin Institute
- Biology textbooks and religion in Pakistan and the US
-
▼
April
(32)
4 comments:
I watched this first, before I took the plunge into the videos from the McGill conference. Lots of interesting questions, but I have one big worry: I don't want discussions over the ethics of robots in war as a distraction of discussing the ethics of war. I know the point was that the ethics of technology in war is an important and largely unaddressed issue within the ethics of war, but I don't want people worrying about robots killing at the expense of worrying about people killing.
I don't know how to anticipate how one will affect the other-- Singer has some speculation on this, as in his discussion of the depersonalization or disconnection of both the warrior and adversary. But it seems to me that War has been getting less personal for its entire history. Trench warfare and chemical warfare in world war one, air warfare in world war two, the atomic bomb, .50 caliber sniper rifles, tomahawk missiles, etc. are all technological progressions in war that have led to depersonalization and disconnection. "All Quiet on the Western Front" was written not about the last few major wars, but the one at the very beginning of the 20th century.
Maybe that should be the first issue to impact speculation on the effect of robotic warfare-- that it doesn't just change the context of war, but that the context of war has already changed. The situations in which drones are used are different from WWII, Vietnam, or even the first Gulf War. Increasing perceptions of disconnect and depersonalization has been happening throughout the last century(for another literary instantiation of this, I would recommend Anthony Swafford's "Jarhead"). Maybe robotic warfare isn't as revolutionary is its technological trappings would have us believe, and we should take the opportunity of the shock caused by the novelty of robotic weapons to re-open discussion about the ethics of war, period.
I guess I found this topic interesting, because there's now a lot more about it over on my blog. I figured you might not want me to squeeze all of it into the comments section here, but consider the above comment a trailer for the post.
I agree about a discussion of ethics of war in itself. However, I would argue the opposite: By conflating the two (ethics of war - and the ethics of the conduct of war with robots) we may end up ignoring the issues regarding (at least) the decision-making robots in war. Unfortunately, wars will continue - but these machines (cylons? :) ) are bringing a new set of problems.
Post a Comment