Taking responsibility for the outcomes of autonomous technologies

Abstract It has been extensively argued that emerging autonomous technologies can represent a challenge for our traditional responsibility practices. Though these challenges differ in a variety of ways, at the center of these challenges is the worrying possibility that there may be outcomes of autonomous technologies for which there are legitimate demands for responsibility but no legitimate target to bear this responsibility. This is well exemplified by the possibility of techno-responsibility gaps. These challenges have elicited a number of responses, including dismissals of the legitimacy of these demands, attempts to find proximate agents that can be legitimately held responsible, and arguments for prohibiting the use of technologies that may open such gaps. In this piece we present a general argument that an overlooked but valuable option lies in adopting a strategy of taking responsibility for the outcomes of autonomous technologies even when the conditions for being legitimately held responsible are not met. We develop a general argument that the adoption of such a strategy is often justified not only by the demands of being responsible, but by practical considerations rooted in our relationships: the need to preserve of the quality of our relationships and the trustworthiness of the socio-technical system of which the autonomous technology is both a result of and embedded in.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Ethics and Information Technology
Published
2025-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-025-09830-9
Citations
3
Primary Topic
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.29

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Taking responsibility for the outcomes of autonomous technologies

Saskia K. Nagel, Niël Henk Conradie
3 citations
Ethics and Information Technology
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
4.29
article

Taking responsibility for the outcomes of autonomous technologies

Saskia K. Nagel, Niël Henk Conradie
article en
3 citations

Abstract

Abstract It has been extensively argued that emerging autonomous technologies can represent a challenge for our traditional responsibility practices. Though these challenges differ in a variety of ways, at the center of these challenges is the worrying possibility that there may be outcomes of autonomous technologies for which there are legitimate demands for responsibility but no legitimate target to bear this responsibility. This is well exemplified by the possibility of techno-responsibility gaps. These challenges have elicited a number of responses, including dismissals of the legitimacy of these demands, attempts to find proximate agents that can be legitimately held responsible, and arguments for prohibiting the use of technologies that may open such gaps. In this piece we present a general argument that an overlooked but valuable option lies in adopting a strategy of taking responsibility for the outcomes of autonomous technologies even when the conditions for being legitimately held responsible are not met. We develop a general argument that the adoption of such a strategy is often justified not only by the demands of being responsible, but by practical considerations rooted in our relationships: the need to preserve of the quality of our relationships and the trustworthiness of the socio-technical system of which the autonomous technology is both a result of and embedded in.

Ethics and Information TechnologyVol. 27(2)
RWTH Aachen University (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, RWTH Aachen University
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
4.29
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.