Driverless Cars: An Analysis

The Moral Challenges of Driverless Cars

In his 2015 article, Kirkpatrick introduces the reader to the topic of self-driving cars, broadly outlining the significance of their development, as well as some of the accompanying ethical questions that require careful consideration. Most importantly, Kirkpatrick highlights that the advent of self-driving cars comes with the serious ethical dilemma of how they should be programmed to behave in the face of an unavoidable accident. That is, it is inevitable that self-driving cars will have to contend with scenarios in which all possible courses of action will result in someone being harmed. Moreover, unlike drivers of conventional cars who respond to imminent accidents on the spot, albeit often merely
Given that around ninety percent of car accidents are at least in part caused by human error – through, for instance, behaviour such as driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol, driving tired, driving aggressively, speeding, and being distracted – self-driving cars have great potential to significantly reduce the amount of road accidents, and thus harm, which is currently experienced with conventional vehicle usage. This will be due to the fact that self-driving cars are anticipated to outperform humans in many areas, such as having better reaction times, an unfaltering capacity to adhere to road rules, along with a greater ability to perceive objects. Notably, they are likely to have the power to track different objects in different directions at the same time, all the while still carrying out general functions such as maintaining speed and navigating towards an intended destination. Moreover, self-driving cars will lack the problematic emotional and psychological traits that surely play a role in many accidents. For example, self-driving cars will never feel 'wronged' whilst driving in traffic and have an aggressive emotional response that leads to an outburst of dangerous driving. Nor will their judgements be clouded by a lack of sleep or distractions such as mobile phones and stereo systems. Instead, self-driving cars will adhere to the rules of the road that
Additionally, when asked to rate the most ethical course of action for a self-driving car, using a scale of 0 (protect the passenger no matter the cost) to 100 (aim at causing the least amount of injury/death), subjects overwhelmingly indicated a preference for utilitarian algorithms. However, when questioned on whether they would be inclined to purchase and travel within a utilitarian self-driving car, although they had just morally praised such a vehicle, they expressed that they would not be inclined to buy or be a passenger in one. Indeed, the reported likelihood of buying a self-driving car that would sacrifice passengers to save a greater number of pedestrians was significantly lower than the likelihood of buying a self-protective model (Bonnefon et al. 2016: 1574). Furthermore, the participants made it clear that they would disapprove of legislation that enforced programming vehicles with such an algorithm, which, as Bonnefon et al. point out, would most likely result in the delay – if not total rejection – of the adoption of self-driving cars. Consequently, many lives would continue to be harmed, and even lost, through the prolonged usage of our current conventional vehicles (Bonnefon et al 2016: