Indian citizens would prefer to save the life of a domestic cat over a human in a runaway car

The result is interesting. Massachusetts Institute of Technology are running a test called the Moral Machine. They’re doing this because with the onset of artificial intelligence computers will have to make ethical decisions about saving lives in respect of driverless cars. It may well apply to many other scenarios as well.

Screenshot from Moral Machine

Screenshot from Moral Machine

You can visit their website and even create your own scenario which would demand making ethical decisions. I suspect that the results will go into algorithms to allow artificial intelligence to make wiser ethical decisions.

I am unable to find the broad range of results but one result apparently is clear. Let’s say you’re in India and you’re driving a car down a main road. The car is out of control and you have a choice between hitting a pet or a group of pets on the road or changing direction and hitting people. According to the Moral Machine results Indian citizens would rather knock down humans than pets.

The strong implication is that the citizens of India place more value on pets than humans. This is obviously a very interesting outcome. It may be Hindu based as 79.8% of the population of India practices Hinduism. Most Hindus are vegetarian. However most Hindus believe that non-human animals are inferior to human beings which does not support that theory.

The results clearly vary between the wide range of cultures across the planet. There will be differences in Asia compared to Europe for example. In countries were elderly people are treated with more respect such as in South Asia and East Asia there will be less of a preference for saving the lives of youngsters over elderly people.

In countries where there is high inequality people’s preferences will veer towards saving executives (high pay) over the lives of homeless people (e.g. Russia).

I would have thought that on almost every occasion the citizens of countries would make a moral decision to save the life of a person over that of an animal. It is probable, too, that when push comes to shove people would save the lives of adults over children but to save the life of a pet over a human would be highly unusual but that appears to be the outcome of this moral dilemma coming out of India.

Source: MIT Moral Machine and

FB comments (see below)
This entry was posted in Animal Rights and tagged , by Michael Broad. Bookmark the permalink.

About Michael Broad

Michael is retired! He retired at age 57 and at Aug 2018 is approaching 70. He worked in many jobs. The last job he did was as a solicitor practicing general law. He loves animals and is passionate about animal welfare. He also loves photography and nature. He hates animal abuse. He has owned and managed this site since 2007. There are around 13k pages so please use the custom search facility!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Please try and upload photos that are small in size of max 500px width and 50 KB size. Large images typical of most default settings on digital cameras may fail to upload. Thanks. Comment rules: (1) respect others (2) threatening, harassing, bullying, insulting and being rude to others is forbidden (3) advocating cat cruelty is forbidden (4) trolls (I know who they are) must use real name and upload a photo of themselves. Enforcement: (1) inappropriate comments are deleted before publication and (2) commenters who demonstrate a desire to flout the rules are banned. Failure to comply with (4) results in non-publication. Lastly, please avoid adding links because spam software regards comments with links as spam and holds them in the spam folder. I delete the spam folder contents daily.