IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - June 2015 - 55

Therefore, I do not provide a detailed practical approach
in this paper. I will, however, briefly sketch a possible way
forward. Incorporating a proxy analysis into design activities
could involve a version of what Verbeek terms "mediation
analysis". His proposal sees engineers engaging users in
iterative design activities intended to uncover the kinds
of moral implications (answers to moral questions reified by the technology) that I have discussed. Once moral
implications are identified, for example once certain proxy
relationships are recognized as being instantiated in use
contexts, they can be analyzed for their impact on user
autonomy. What is the nature of the proxy relationship?
Does the user have a reasonable choice of settings that
will avoid paternalism? Is the user adequately informed
about the defaults we have designed into the technology that instantiate proxy relationships? Is it feasible to
design alternative modes of operation into the device to
maximize user autonomy with respect to any particular
proxy relationship? Do default settings threaten unjustifiably hamper user autonomy? These are just a few of the
questions that could help guide a proxy analysis in design.
At times, technology presents us with ethical challenges that threaten established design practices. As we
(engineers and philosophers) have done when faced with
other ethical implications of technology - environmental, social, health - we can confront the recognition that
technology can instantiate moral proxy relationships head
on and accept our role in the designer-technology-user
relationship with its full moral weight. That proxy relationships seem to burden designers with added responsibility should not be cause to abandon the design of all
technologies that instantiate them, nor does it allow us
to cry foul against those who point to them as problems
in need of a solution. A middle ground must be sought
that acknowledges proxy relationships for what they are,
while seeking a design solution that moves us forward.
I have argued here that there is a problem in need of
a design solution: technology can function as moral
proxy, and can sometimes subject users to problematic
paternalistic relationships. I have also sketched a path
forward: a proxy analysis can be applied in design to help
bolster user autonomy where it should be bolstered, and
to avoid subjecting users to unjustifiable paternalism by
design. We have given up on paternalism as a principle
in healthcare and bioethics and have instead adopted
autonomy as a replacement - the doctors still have work
and patients appear better off. We should reject paternalism by design while promoting autonomy by design for
the same good reasons.

Author Information
The author is with the Department of Philosophy,
Queen's University, Kingston, Ont., Canada. Email:
jason.millar@queensu.ca.
june 2015

∕

Acknowledgment
The author thanks Ian Kerr and Sergio Sismondo for
their many intellectual interactions over the years that
have left me a better philosopher, professor, engineer,
and person. Peter Asaro and Ryan Calo also offered
generous feedback on versions of this work, as did the
many participants at We Robot 2014 and the 2014 IEEE
International Symposium on Ethics in Engineering, Science, and Technology.

References

[1] I. Kerr, "Digital locks and the automation of virtue," in From "Radical Extremism" to "Balanced Copyright": Canadian Copyright and
the Digital Agenda, M. Geist, Ed. Toronto, Canada: Irwin Law, 2010.
[2] L. Winner, The Whale and the Reactor. Chicago, IL: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1986.
[3] B. Latour, "Where are the missing masses: The sociology of a few
mundane artefacts," in Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, W.E. Bijker and J. Law, Eds. Cambridge,
MA.: M.I.T. Press, 1992, pp. 225-258.
[4] P-P. Verbeek, "Materializing morality: design ethics and technological
mediation," Sci. Tech. Hum. Values, vol. 31, pp. 361-380, May 2006.
[5] E-H. Kluge, "Consent and the incompetent patient," in Readings in
Biomedical Ethics, A Canadian Focus, 3rd ed., E-H Kluge, Ed. Toronto,
Canada: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005, pp. 146-148.
[6] N. Cantor, Making Medical Decisions for the Profoundly Mentally Disabled, Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press, 2005.
[7] Re S.D. (1983). 3 W.W.R. 618 (B.C.S.C.).
[8] E-H. Kluge, "After 'Eve': Whither proxy decision making," in Readings in Biomedical Ethics, A Canadian Focus, 3rd ed., E-H Kluge, Ed.
Toronto, Canada: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005, pp. 186-194.
[9] R. Calo, "Robotics and the new cyberlaw," California Law Rev.,
vol. 103, (to be published).
[10] J. Millar, and I. Kerr, "Delegation, relinquishment and responsibility: The prospect of expert robots," in Robot Law, R. Calo, M.
Froomkin and I. Kerr, Eds. Northampton: Edward Elgar, to be published.
[11] H. Draper, and T. Sorell, "Patients' responsibilities in medical ethics," in The Bioethics Reader, Editors' Choice, R. Chadwick, H. Kuhse,
W. Landman, U. Schüklenk, and P Singer, Eds. Malden, MA: Blackwell,
2007, pp. 73-90.
[12] A. Pollock, "The internal cardiac defibrillator," in The Inner
History of Devices, S. Turkle, Ed. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press, 2008,
pp. 98-111.
[13] P. Murray, "The history of informed consent," Iowa Ort. J.,
vol. 10, pp.104-109, 1990.
[14] O. O'Neill, Autonomy and Trust in Bioethics. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002.
[15] A.R. Jonsen, A Short History of Medical Ethics. Oxford, U.K.:
Oxford Univ. Press, 2008.
[16] College of Nurses of Ontario, Practice guideline: consent, 2009.
[17] T. Vanderbilt, "Let the robot drive," WIRED, p. 86, Feb 2012.
[18] E. Guizzo, "How Google's self-driving car works," IEEE Spectrum,
Oct. 2011.
[19] M. Slosson, "Google gets first self-driven car license in Nevada,"
Reuters.com, May 2012.
[20] E. Hayden, "Speeding into the future: Self-driving cars are now
legal in California," Time: Newsfeed, Sept. 2012.
[21] D. Newcomb, "You won't need a driver's license by 2040," Wired.
com: Autopia, Sept. 2012.
[22] L. Laursen, "Self-driving car rules will lag tech, think tanks predict," IEEE Spectrum, Jan. 2014.
[23] J. Millar, "You should have a say in your robot car's code of ethics," WIRED.com, Sept. 2014.
[24] G. Marcus, "Moral machines," New Yorker, Nov. 2012.
[25] P. Lin, "The ethics of autonomous cars," The Atlantic, Oct. 2013.

IEEE Technology and Society Magazine

55
http://www.Reuters.com http://www.WIRED.com
Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Technology and Society Magazine - June 2015
