Week 4 Discussion

The discussion of morality regarding robots was fascinating and raises a lot of questions regarding other forms of moral literacy and how children develop this moral capacity. Kahn et al mentioned “most children believed that Robovie deserved fair treatment and should not be harmed psychologically” and additionally that “participants attributed some level of moral accountability to Robovie for the harm that Robovie caused” (3). However, we often see teens playing violent games such as Grand Theft Auto where the player is seen identifying as a character with non-existent moral capacity. There is no accountability for these characters’ senseless killing and destruction and teens thoroughly enjoy playing this game. Why is there such disparity in moral responsibility? Does it have to do with the direct repercussions of a physical object as opposed to a virtual world? The characters in GTA take on the biological, psychological and perceptual properties of humans and yet, they do not receive the same treatment as physical objects in the world. However, they still play a large role in developing the moral literacy of young adults. How can we capture the fantasy aspect of GTA while still maintaining valuable moral responsibility on the characters? Or does it require a physical being, such as a robot, to truly stimulate a moral responsibility from children?