Understanding the robot: Comments on Goudey and Bonnin (2016)

Goudey and Bonnin provide an important demonstration of our willingness to accept robots regardless of the degree to which they look like us. This comment seeks to expand their insights in two ways. First, by broadening our conception of what constitutes a robot, I argue that we have already accepted many non-humanoid robots, and that even robotic entities without a visual presence can be compelling and engaging. Second, I suggest expanding the original paper's psychological treatment of category ambiguity through the anthropological treatment of Mary Douglas. Douglas suggests that category ambiguity is abhorrent because things perceived to transgress categorical boundaries challenge our cultural beliefs and social order. In the case of robots, the beliefs that are challenged are our basic understandings of what makes humans unique and privileged in the world. As machines grow more and more capable, by some accounts they threaten to eclipse and even supplant the human race. I identify several behavioral and ethical research issues that are imperative if we are to deal with and prepare for such possibilities.