{"title":"信任作为人类脆弱性的解决方案:对护理机器人信任的伦理考虑。","authors":"Mario Kropf","doi":"10.1111/nup.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the care sector, professionals face numerous challenges, such as a lack of resources, overloaded wards, physical and psychological strain, stressful constellations with patients and cooperation with medical professionals. Care robots are therefore increasingly being used to provide relief or to test new forms of interaction. However, this also raises the question of trust in these technical companions and the potential vulnerability to which these people then expose themselves. This article deals with an ethical analysis of the two concepts of trust and vulnerability in the context of care robotics. The first step is to examine what can be understood by vulnerability, focusing specifically on Misztal's three proposed types (relationships, future anticipation, past experiences). This strategy is often used as a starting point by authors and also seems relevant for the connection to the concept of trust. In a second step, these three types of human vulnerability are examined on the basis of a technical concept of trust. It is shown that (1) relationships and thus also interdependence can create additional options, (2) the anticipation problem with regard to the actions of others also makes responsibility transferable and (3) an explication of freedom is also associated with potential traumatic experiences. The final step brings together the previous considerations and makes it clear once again that trust in a care robot need not only be associated with vulnerability, but that vulnerability can also potentially be reduced, transferred and overcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":49724,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Philosophy","volume":"26 2","pages":"e70020"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896634/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trust as a Solution to Human Vulnerability: Ethical Considerations on Trust in Care Robots.\",\"authors\":\"Mario Kropf\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/nup.70020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the care sector, professionals face numerous challenges, such as a lack of resources, overloaded wards, physical and psychological strain, stressful constellations with patients and cooperation with medical professionals. Care robots are therefore increasingly being used to provide relief or to test new forms of interaction. However, this also raises the question of trust in these technical companions and the potential vulnerability to which these people then expose themselves. This article deals with an ethical analysis of the two concepts of trust and vulnerability in the context of care robotics. The first step is to examine what can be understood by vulnerability, focusing specifically on Misztal's three proposed types (relationships, future anticipation, past experiences). This strategy is often used as a starting point by authors and also seems relevant for the connection to the concept of trust. In a second step, these three types of human vulnerability are examined on the basis of a technical concept of trust. It is shown that (1) relationships and thus also interdependence can create additional options, (2) the anticipation problem with regard to the actions of others also makes responsibility transferable and (3) an explication of freedom is also associated with potential traumatic experiences. The final step brings together the previous considerations and makes it clear once again that trust in a care robot need not only be associated with vulnerability, but that vulnerability can also potentially be reduced, transferred and overcome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49724,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nursing Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"26 2\",\"pages\":\"e70020\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11896634/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nursing Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.70020\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nup.70020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Trust as a Solution to Human Vulnerability: Ethical Considerations on Trust in Care Robots.
In the care sector, professionals face numerous challenges, such as a lack of resources, overloaded wards, physical and psychological strain, stressful constellations with patients and cooperation with medical professionals. Care robots are therefore increasingly being used to provide relief or to test new forms of interaction. However, this also raises the question of trust in these technical companions and the potential vulnerability to which these people then expose themselves. This article deals with an ethical analysis of the two concepts of trust and vulnerability in the context of care robotics. The first step is to examine what can be understood by vulnerability, focusing specifically on Misztal's three proposed types (relationships, future anticipation, past experiences). This strategy is often used as a starting point by authors and also seems relevant for the connection to the concept of trust. In a second step, these three types of human vulnerability are examined on the basis of a technical concept of trust. It is shown that (1) relationships and thus also interdependence can create additional options, (2) the anticipation problem with regard to the actions of others also makes responsibility transferable and (3) an explication of freedom is also associated with potential traumatic experiences. The final step brings together the previous considerations and makes it clear once again that trust in a care robot need not only be associated with vulnerability, but that vulnerability can also potentially be reduced, transferred and overcome.
期刊介绍:
Nursing Philosophy provides a forum for discussion of philosophical issues in nursing. These focus on questions relating to the nature of nursing and to the phenomena of key relevance to it. For example, any understanding of what nursing is presupposes some conception of just what nurses are trying to do when they nurse. But what are the ends of nursing? Are they to promote health, prevent disease, promote well-being, enhance autonomy, relieve suffering, or some combination of these? How are these ends are to be met? What kind of knowledge is needed in order to nurse? Practical, theoretical, aesthetic, moral, political, ''intuitive'' or some other?
Papers that explore other aspects of philosophical enquiry and analysis of relevance to nursing (and any other healthcare or social care activity) are also welcome and might include, but not be limited to, critical discussions of the work of nurse theorists who have advanced philosophical claims (e.g., Benner, Benner and Wrubel, Carper, Schrok, Watson, Parse and so on) as well as critical engagement with philosophers (e.g., Heidegger, Husserl, Kuhn, Polanyi, Taylor, MacIntyre and so on) whose work informs health care in general and nursing in particular.