Should Doctor Robot possess moral empathy?
Critics of clinical artificial intelligence (AI) suggest that the technology is ethically harmful because it may lead to the dehumanization of the doctor–patient relationship (DPR) by eliminating moral empathy, which is viewed as a distinctively human trait. The benefits of clinical empathy—that is,...
| Publicado en: | Bioethics Vol. 39; no. 1; pp. 98 - 108 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Jan2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=181778740&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 181778740 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 02699702 6PJ jtl: Bioethics issn: 02699702 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Jan2025 vid: 39 iid: 1 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 181778740 10.1111/bioe.13345 ppf: 98 ppct: 10 formats: tig: atl: Should Doctor Robot possess moral empathy? aug: au: Sirgiovanni, Elisabetta affil: Section of History of Medicine and Bioethics, Department of Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy su: Empathy Criticism Psychiatry Respect Compassion Philosophy Ethics Physician-patient relations Physicians Health equity Affect (Psychology) Medical logic Patient autonomy Engineering Decision making in clinical medicine Robotics sug: subj: Empathy Criticism Psychiatry Respect Compassion Philosophy Ethics Physician-patient relations Physicians Health equity Affect (Psychology) Offices of physicians Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists) Medical logic Patient autonomy Engineering Decision making in clinical medicine Robotics keyword: artificial intelligence clinical Doctor Robot doctor–patient relationship empathy moral artificial intelligence clinical Doctor Robot doctor–patient relationship empathy moral ab: Critics of clinical artificial intelligence (AI) suggest that the technology is ethically harmful because it may lead to the dehumanization of the doctor–patient relationship (DPR) by eliminating moral empathy, which is viewed as a distinctively human trait. The benefits of clinical empathy—that is, moral empathy applied in the clinical context—are widely praised, but this praise is often unquestioning and lacks context. In this article, I will argue that criticisms of clinical AI based on appeals to empathy are misplaced. As psychological and philosophical research has shown, empathy leads to certain types of biased reasoning and choices. These biases of empathy consistently impact the DPR. Empathy may lead to partial judgments and asymmetric DPRs, as well as disparities in the treatment of patients, undermining respect for patient autonomy and equality. Engineers should consider the flaws of empathy when designing affective artificial systems in the future. The nature of sympathy and compassion (i.e., displaying emotional concern while maintaining some balanced distance) has been defended by some ethicists as more beneficial than perspective‐taking in the clinical context. However, these claims do not seem to have impacted the AI debate. Thus, this article will also argue that if machines are programmed for affective behavior, they should also be given some ethical scaffolding. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|