Responses to a Critique of Artificial Moral Agents
This paper was proposed, edited and co-written by Adam Poulsen, along with co-writers: Michael Anderson, Susan L. Anderson, Ben Byford, Fabio Fossa, Erica L. Neely, Alejandro Rosas, Alan Winfield.
The paper concerns the purpose of Machine Ethics research and is a direct rebuttal to the paper entitled: Critiquing the Reasons for Making Artificial Moral Agents. Over the course of the paper each writer introduces their research interests then proceeds to outline their take of each section of the other paper by Aimee van Wynsberghem, Scott Robbins.
It was an honour to be included along side prominent academics and writers on this subject. I hope to continue adding to the field in future papers and industry based research, as well as my continued work disseminating the ideas on my podcast the Machine Ethics Podcast.
Here is a link to the full paper and the paper it was in response to Critiquing the Reasons for Making Artificial Moral Agents by Aimee van Wynsberghe & Scott Robbins
