Introduction
The chosen case discusses the ethics of autonomous vehicles using the example of a fatal collision between a 2015 Tesla Model S and a tractor-trailer. The car’s program responsible for collision prevention malfunctioned, and the driver did not have time to react. The key ethical issue, in this case, is the safety of autonomous vehicles. The author mentions that autonomous cars are supposed to be safer, but they only reduce the risk of road incidents by 40%. People operating such vehicles may trust in the programming too much, and thus will be unable to take control and avoid the crash when needed. Additionally, there are also some conflicting ethical obligations that might prevent developers from creating a safer autonomous program for driving the vehicle. For example, there may be a collision between the safety of the driver, the protection of other people on the road, and the traffic laws.
Eight Moral Tests
Because of these problems, autonomous vehicles would not pass Davis’ Eight Moral Tests. For instance, there may be cases where autonomous cars do more harm than regular ones, and thus this option would not be preferable in the harm test or the reversibility test. Furthermore, the accountability of developers for road incidents that occur due to program errors mean that autonomous vehicles are unethical based on the results of professional and organizational tests. This analysis shows that the safety of autonomous cars is significant problems that affect the ethics of producing and using this vehicle type. The primary alternative, in this case, is for Tesla and other autonomous vehicle producers to provide correct instructions to drivers in a way that ensures that they comply. For instance, installing wheel sensors to remind drivers to keep their hands on the wheel would be one option to make driving these vehicles safer. Alternatively, the producers could recall the technology until it is perfected, and the errors in programming are fixed to guarantee safety.
Student A
Thank you for your discussion of the case. I agree with you that the case portrays problems in the safety of autonomous vehicles and that both customers and producers should take it into consideration. You also made a good point about advertising such vehicles and autonomous, and I think that this is among the core problems in the case. When drivers perceive their cars as requiring little to no guidance, they will be more relaxed on the road and will not be ready to take action when needed. Misleading advertisements have a significant impact on how drivers perceive their cars and the driving process. Hence, I think that you are correct in saying that producers need to take action. However, one question that was left unanswered to me was whether or not there are other options besides recalling the vehicles completely. Do you think that a change in advertisement and technologies to keep the driver alert could fix the problem?
Student B
Thank you for describing your thoughts on the case. I agree with you that the manufacturer’s fault in the present case is limited because the driver did not follow the instructions correctly. However, one piece of information that was missing from your discussion was whether or not you think that the manufacturers fulfilled their responsibility of protecting customers’ safety in this case. Besides the technology itself, there are also other factors that influence drivers’ behavior, including their understanding of the technology its application. In this case, it is possible that the driver has not received all the information about level 1 and 2 automation, as well as about the risks of this technology.