An ethical argument for replacing humans with machines in meaningless workplaces

• Main Author: Kelly, Bridget
• Format: Others
• Language: en
• Published: 2021
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/10539/30720

A Research Report submitted to the Faculty of Humanities, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, Applied Ethics for Professionals, 2020 === According to this research paper, work can be considered a prudential good, and thus contributes to well-being in a positive or negative manner under the following philosophical theories of well-being: Desire-Fulfillment Theories, Objective List Theories, and the Objective Goods Perfectionist theories of well-being. In this report I argue that meaningless work contributes negatively to well-being and that there is therefore an ethical argument to replace humans with machines in meaningless workplaces. I defend the lack of definition of meaningless work on the grounds that whatever the accepted construal of this notion is, it does not contribute to well-being. In terms of the paternalistic nature of my argument, I claim that under some circumstances, governments make decisions that may limit the autonomy of their citizens in one respect, to guarantee freedom in another respect, and I claim that the benefits of a moderate and limited amount of paternalism greatly outweigh its drawbacks. Finally, I discuss what types of work human beings are good at; not all meaningless work can be done by machines today === CK2021