Human Factors Ethics and Morality


Human Factors Ethics and Morality

The purpose of this paper is to identify the general human factors, ethical and moral issues related to unmanned aerial system (UAS) use during warfare.

Some human factors required to successfully operate UAS during war time operations are situational awareness, crew resource management, crew training, scheduling, knowledge of systems, risk mitigation measures and qualifications among many others (Hocraffer & Nang, 2017).  The most important human factor during these UAS operations is the actual decision to use lethal force.  While many of the other mission functions are autonomous, the decision regarding lethal force has human supervision (Johnstone, 2017).

Ethical considerations relate to how a set of rules or governmental policy compares to the “right and wrong” of a moral code.  In democratic societies, many concerns about UAS during wars are muted by local political decisions (Kaag & Kreps, 2013).  The issue of being “ethical” is dependent on who one asks.  The society receiving the attack will find UAS use as being “unethical.” The offensive side will define UAS use as the “end justifying the means” (Barela, 2015). 

Moral considerations relate to an individual’s sense of a “right and wrong.” These types of values are more likely to shape the local environment relating directly to indigenous peoples (Barela, 2015).  These values are generally more specific and may have additional subcategories within gender, age, religions or other groups.  The act of “killing” with UAS abroad may be acceptable to a religious group within the United States, believing that national security is an outstanding goal.  Others may view any “killing” as murder and not representing values which uphold the sanctity of all life.  These different citizens will presumably vote for politicians and ballot measures representing their personal morality, beginning a more complicated process of transforming personal morality into nation-wide ethics. 

There is a fine line between national security and using UAS as killing tools.  Any acts of lethal force as sure to cause innocent deaths.  As technology has advanced, collateral damages to innocents has been reduced by more selective targeting. This more precise targeting and use of force may be seen and a more ethical and moral way to engage in war.

The introduction of autonomous action into the lethal force decision making will change this conversation entirely.  This specific topic is technologically possible, and those discussions need to be engaged in now. 

References

Barela, S. J. (2015). Legitimacy and drones: investigating the legality, morality and efficacy of    ucavs. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Johnstone, B. V. (2013). THE MORALITY OF DRONES: Targeted killing. Compass, 47(3), 21- 26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu
/docview/1466286538?accountid=27203

Hocraffer, A & Nang, C. (2017). A Meta-Analysis of Human System Interfaces in Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Swarm Management.  Retrieved from https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/science/article/pii/S0003687016300989

Kaag, J., & Kreps, S. (2013, Spring). Drones and democratic peace. The Brown Journal of World
Affairs, 19, 97-109. Retrieved from   http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.libproxy.
db.erau.edu/docview/1649691316?accountid=27203

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Value of Case Analysis

"Orientalism," a backbone of the United States drone program?

UAS Crew Member Selection