From the SelectedWorks of Yueh-Hsuan Weng

Fall September 25, 2019

The Religious Impacts of Taoism on Ethically
Aligned Design in HRI
Yueh-Hsuan Weng, Tohoku University
Yasuhisa Hirata, Tohoku University
Osamu Sakura, The University of Tokyo
Yusuke Sugahara, Tokyo Institute of Technology

Available at: https://works.bepress.com/weng_yueh_hsuan/113/

International Journal of Social Robotics
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00594-z

The Religious Impacts of Taoism on Ethically Aligned Design in HRI
Yueh‑Hsuan Weng1,2 · Yasuhisa Hirata3 · Osamu Sakura1,4 · Yusuke Sugahara5
Accepted: 16 September 2019
© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Abstract
As robots become more and more ubiquitous in human society, the study of their emergence becomes critical to assessing
robot performance and appropriateness for different applications, and for employment across countries with different cultural backgrounds. Throughout history, religion has been a major element in all human cultures, and there is a long historyof religious commentary on the idea of automation. With emerging robotic platforms and applications already beginning totouch on the subject of religion, now is the right time to begin discussing this potentially controversial topic. The objectiveof this article is to analyze what impacts Taoist religion may have on the use of Ethically Aligned Design in future human–robot interaction.
Keywords Taoism · AI and culture · Chinese studies · HRI · Ethically Aligned Design

1 Introduction
One critical question about how to best prepare for an
emerging society of human–robot co-existence has to dowith how to design robot sociability. This covers considerations for various fundamental aspects of human society,including ethics, law, personal safety, and religion, amongst
others [1]. In particular, religious practices have differedacross cultures since the beginning of human society. Suchfactors matter when considering how to design a proper
human–robot relationship in different societies. That said,
current ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) studies
often neglect how important cultural factors may be. This
* Yueh‑Hsuan Wengyueh‑hsuan.weng@riken.jp
1

Center for Advanced Intelligence Project (AIP), RIKEN,
1‑4‑1 Nihonbashi, Chuo‑ku, Tokyo 103‑0027, Japan

2

Frontier Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Sciences,
Tohoku University, 6‑3 Aramaki aza Aoba, Aoba‑ku,
Sendai 980‑8578, Japan3

Department of Robotics, Graduate School of Engineering,Tohoku University, 6‑6‑01 Aramaki aza Aoba, Aoba‑ku,
Sendai 980‑8579, Japan

4

Interfaculty Initiative in Information Studies, Universityof Tokyo, 7‑3‑1 Hongo, Bunkyo‑ku, Tokyo 113‑0033, Japan

5

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Tokyo
Institute of Technology, 2‑12‑1 Ookayama, Meguro‑ku,
Tokyo 152‑8550, Japanknowledge gap in investigating the ELSI of AI and robotics is especially apparent when we touch on comparative orinternational issues [2].
The earliest case of robots and religion involves the Golemfrom Jewish folklore, a clay doll that loyally obeys its creator’s orders. There are many religious restrictions for using
the Golem. If its master doesn’t follow these restrictions, heor she might lose control of the Golem [3]. The Golem folklore is believed to be the source that inspired Karel Čapek tocreate the character of “Robot” in his science fiction literature
work R.U.R. (Rossumovi Univerzální Roboti) in 1920 [4].
The second kind of early example has to do with applying
automation to religious activities. For example, the Hero ofAlexandria’s invention of the world’s first vending machinefor selling holy water, and of an automatic door for controlling the gate of a Greek temple [5]. Today, along with thesteady progress of technology, robots are gradually entering our daily lives. Such technological intimacy will create athird type of relationship between robots and religion, which
we can call “religious impact on robots”.
In 2017, there was a debate over the question, “Can a robot
be religious?” when Saudi Arabia granted citizenship to Sophia
the robot [6]. Some people worried it might be difficult to expect
Sophia’s behavior to meet the requirements of Islamic disciplinefor female citizens. At the same time, half a world away, a Japanese company used the humanoid robot Pepper to read a Buddhist
prayer [7]. A question naturally arises from this topic: can intelligent robots be affected in some way by reciting such a prayer?

13Vol.:(0123456789)

International Journal of Social Robotics

Religious context is important for the creation of “Ethical Robots” as well. Hiroko Kamide said that the conceptof “One Being for Two Origins”, considers the unificationof technology, nature, and human beings. It emerges fromthe theory of three different aspects: “Good”, “Bad”, and“Muki (Avyakata)”. Though “One Being for Two Origins”
is from the teachings of Buddha, it is not an absolute concept—in other words, right or wrong exists in the eye of thebeholder. As long as humans accept that they are beholden
to subjective mechanisms of perceiving the world, it should
be possible to develop ethical robots which adhere to thosemechanisms [8]. In Christianity, Jack Crosbie explainsthat sex with robots is sinful. Suppose in the future a carecenter wants to hire an AGI (artificial general intelligence)
humanoid robot for providing sexual services to quadriplegic patients who have physiological demands. Regardlessof whether the robot conceives of its behavior as part ofnecessary healthcare services for the patient, or whether it
simply follows instructions from its master to perform such
behaviors without any awareness, neither is condoned froma Christian perspective [9]. These examples teach us thatwhile there is a large area of overlap between ethics andreligion, they do not always imply the same conclusion. So,
it is necessary to treat the study of the impact of religion on
robotic design as an independent subject, and not merely asub-topic under AI ethics.
The relationship between religion and technology should
not be conceived of as only involving religion’s impact ontechnology. On the contrary, technology itself can impact
or become a religion for human beings when there is a hugetechnological imbalance between an artificial AI, for example, and the human race. It is similar to the Cargo Cult phenomenon that happened during and after the Second World
War, when Vanuatu islanders worshipped the US Military’s
airplanes, which dropped goods by accident from time totime on their islands [10]. However, what kind, if any, of atechno-religion may be created from a future AI is still not
clear at this time.
We can see that religion may be one of universal elements
underpinning the operation of human society. What’s more,humans show different levels of social acceptance of andattitudes towards AI and robots under the sometimes subtle
influence of different religions. Some say that the different
attitude towards humanoid robots between East and West isdue to religious influences. In Christianity, the fundamental
belief that everything is created by God may cause people toreject robots that imitate human appearance. Shinto’s animist
origins on the other hand may encourage people to treat
humanoid robots as a natural extension of existing beings
and as human companions. Such debate has been the main
axis of discussions in robots and religion studies in the past
[11–15]. Outside of Christianity and Shinto, however, it
seems that discussion of other religions is relatively limited.

13

In particular, when it comes to Taoism, we cannot find any
previous academic publication on this topic.
Ethically Aligned Design (EAD) is a set of ethical guidelines developed by IEEE Global A/IS Initiative, which covers several issues such as General Principles, Embedding
Values into Autonomous Intelligent Systems, Methodologies, Personal Data, Law, Policy, Classical Ethics in A/
IS, and Mixed Reality in ICT, amongst others. It aims toremove people’s fear of AI technologies, while also showing that incorporating ethics into technology development
helps innovation. The version of the EAD document that weused is Version 2, which was published in December 2017[16]. Applying EAD guidelines to human–robot interaction
can improve robot sociability through a Top-Down design
method, and also reduce cross-cultural issues in the design
and usage of robots. In this article, we aim to investigate thereligious impacts of Taoism on Ethically Aligned Design inhuman–robot interaction.

2 Taoist Beliefs and Practices in Reference
to AI and Robotics
The earliest robot story in Taoism classics was from “Liezi”.
One day a craftsman called Yen-Shih brought an artificial,humanoid dancer to demonstrate to King Mu of Zhou
(976–922 BC or 956–918 BC). The king was impressed by
the effect given by the artificial dancer, because it was difficult to tell that the dance was not being performed by a realhuman being. However, when at the end of its performancethe dancer suddenly winked its eye at the king’s concubines,
the king saw this and was very angry, even wanting to kill
Yen-Shih. Yen-Shih was terrified, and he cut the humanoid
dancer’s body info half to show the king that what had flirted
with his concubines was just a machine and not a real humanbeing [17].
The philosophical practices in Chinese Culture, “Ru-TaoShi (儒道釋)” are more than just a religion but also a way oflife in China. Among them, “Tao (道)” means Taoism which
covers dual meanings as philosophical thoughts (philosophical Tao) and the religion (religious Tao). The philosophicalTao comes from late period of Chun Qiu (春秋) (B.C. 5 century). Their classic texts are “Tao Te Ching (道德經)” and“Zhuangzi (莊子)” by the famous Chinese thinkers Laozi (­老子) and Zhuang Zhou (莊周), who advocate ideas including the “doctrine of inaction” (wu wei 無為) and the “way ofcoexistence with nature” [18, 19].
On the other hand, the religious side of Tao refers to areligious organization founded by Celestial Master Zhang in
the last years of the Han Dynasty (A.D. 184–220) in mainland China. Though it still adopts thoughts from the philosophical Tao as its theoretical foundation, it adds Chinese
folk beliefs about “gods and ghosts”, the worship of nature,

International Journal of Social Robotics

and the doctrines of Fangxian (方仙), and Huanglao (黃老) to form a mixed, religious body of thought. Note thatin this article, when we use the term Taoism we refer tothe religious Tao. An apparent difference between the two
perspectives of Taoism can be seen in Laozi’s relative status. In the philosophical Tao, Laozi is a guru who inspires
people to discover many secrets from his masterpiece Tao
Te Ching. However, in the religious Tao, Laozi has anotherstatus called Taishang Laojun (太上老君) or Daode Tianzun(道德天尊) and is one of the world’s three superior Gods.
What is called “Tao” can be recognized as Taishang Laojun, who is an ultimate, unlimited supernatural power. We
can also refer to Tao as “one”. According to Tai Ping Ching(太平經), one is the root of Tao and the origin of life [20].
This gives theoretical support to Taoist ideas about keeping one’s good health as well as recovering one’s original
simplicity. Another way to observe Tao is via the preservation of one’s spiritual essence, or “qi (氣)”, and this qi is a
way towards becoming a Taoist sage. After the Northern andSouthern dynasties period (A.D. 220–589), when Buddhists
criticized the qi approach, there came to be a new way toobserve Tao via “mind”. [21] Because Tao from the classics
Tao Te Ching is presented in a vague way, Tao as “one”,
qi, or mind have all been gradually generated through theconcept’s long history as ontological mediums for people tosense the abstract Tao.
To observe Tao is the start of applying the teachings of
Taoism to one’s daily life. The end of practicing Taoism
to its followers is to become an immortal Taoist sage in a
mystical land, a process called “de dao cheng xian (得道成仙)” in Chinese. Under this ultimate goal, a comparative difference with Christianity, Islam and Buddhism is that Taoism encourages people to live in the present and pay more
attention to the world that we are existing in, not to imagine
the other world. Because there is neither heaven nor hell to
go to after death, people should focus their energies on thepresent by practicing Taoism in their daily life.
In Taoism, Tao is the origin of everything, as well as themaster of the universe. In such a Tao-centered world there
are many Gods and spirits who can perceive the existenceof Tao. By the degree of their perception of Tao, they form ahierarchy among these Gods and spirits. This is the foundation of the polytheistic beliefs of Taoism.
Joseph Needham had commented that Taoism boosted
ancient Chinese science and technology developments,
because it helped the Chinese cultivate a scientific attitude.
Also, East Asia’s Chemistry, Mineralogy, Botany, and Pharmaceutics all originated with Taoism [22]. Sun Yiping said
that Taoism is the root of science and technology in ancient
China. Science and technology had been despised for a long
period of time under Confucian society. But Taoist followers
don’t reject using objective terminology and technical methods to explain how the universe operates. In other words,

they practice empirical science for religious purposes [23].
This kind of open attitude to science and technology from
Taoism should make it more likely that AI and robotics are
accepted relatively easily.
When AI and robotics enter a society with a Taoist culture, at the initial stage they can be efficient tools to support
humans in their daily lives. Some examples include assistive
robotics for in-field Monitoring and Communications Assistance and Nursing Care Assistance: both applications needsophisticated machine intelligence to ensure elderly people
can be properly cared for at home. In these cases, robots are
expected to have higher levels of physical and psychological perception capabilities when they serve elderly people,
unlike assistance with bed transfers, walking, using the bathroom, and bathing which need lower levels of AI to ensure
its physical interactions with humans [24]. As more AI tools
are used in human living spaces as tools, such huge demandfor AI products will trigger an intelligence explosion, lead
AI across the Singularity, and finally become Superintelligent [25].
A new relationship between human beings and AI willneed to be defined when AI reaches the level of Superintelligence. From Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics to the recent
German ministry’s proposal towards creating an ethical code
to ensure AI safety in self-driving cars [26], these artificial
machine ethics are all based on a premise: that robots aretools for humans, or that robots should serve their humanmasters. Under this premise, robots should protect human
goods and benefits, and the priority issue is human safety.
This is just like the first law of the Three Laws of Robotics notes that: “A robot may not injure a human being or,
through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm”[27]. Such “Safety Intelligence” in human–robot interaction
works fine when humans hold superior moral status to AI/
robots [28].
Following the development of AI, machines could eventually be given a moral status if they can feel pain, and could
even be considered subject to law when they have an equallevel of consciousness to human beings, or even when they
are a superior existence to humans after becoming Superintelligent. At this level, AI safety issues are beyond earlymentioned “Safety Intelligence”, but instead on how to avoid
existential risks caused by Superintelligence [29]. The proposed transformation in AI safety will influence machine
ethics as well, as human superiority may no longer be feasible under this new AI paradigm. As we progress toward theera of Superintelligence, we may have to discard traditional
ideas centered around human superiority to artificial agents,
and instead look for a practical way to coexist with superior
artificial beings.
In Taoism’s world, AI and robots are not restricted toonly an inferior or superior existence to human beings, but
can emerge out of the discussion of material things into a13

International Journal of Social Robotics

method or way for humans to change themselves. As discussed, to become immortal Taoist sages in a mystical otherworld is the supposed ultimate goal for Taoist believers.
Additionally, as noted, through the long history of China,
there have been several different approaches to this question suggested. In light of this, AI and robotics could be afeasible way to help Taoist practitioners get closer to theirgoal of becoming immortals. Though using these technological approaches can be an effective way to reach the goalof practicing Taoism, one concern is about breaking down
the balance of human coexistence with our natural environments. If it is true, what will be the boundary to stop the overuse of AI and robotics?
In this article, we want to discuss potential religious
impact of Taoism on AI and robotics from three different
perspectives: (1) AI/robots as superior existence akin togods; (2) AI/robots as a method for becoming immortals;(3) AI/robots as tools to assist humans (Fig. 1).

3 AI/Robots as Superior Beings Akin to Gods
Deified of Laozi (老子)—Taishang Laojun (太上老君) or
Daode Tianzun (道德天尊)—is one of the three superiorgods, along with Yuanshi Tianzun (原始天尊) and Lingbao Tianzun (靈寶天尊). They are called “San Qing (三清)”. Taoism is polytheistic, including the three main gods
mentioned above, and up to 233 total gods in the Taoist
world overall [30]. Generally speaking, this number can bedivided into three areas: (1) Natural Gods, (2) Thing Gods,(3) Human–Ghost Gods.
It might be difficult for people to imagine AI as a kindof superior existence to humans presently, but when AI
crosses the Singularity they will achieve human-like intelligence—known as artificial general intelligence—and thengrow even more powerful and intelligent, becoming Superintelligent entities, akin to gods. Though it is a long-term
process, someday AI will become superior in existence, orGod-like, as it were; one question to ask, then, is will beliefin Taoist gods cause people to treat Superintelligent entities
in a unique way?
Though Taoism and Shinto contain aspects of both polytheism and animism, Taoism’s acceptance of an artificial
being of the kind described above is not as high as Shinto’s.
In the Shinto worldview, there are 8 million gods and spirits
that exist in natural environments, so it comes as no surprise for the Japanese to treat things in a special way. For
example, the “tomb of needles” is a place to worship needles
that have helped their human partners accomplish tasks likethose of a tailor [31]. Except for Thing Gods, it is rare for
Taoists to treat things per se in a special way, like the Shinto
attitude towards sewing needles. One exception can be god
idols, which are humanoid wooden idols placed inside Taoist
temples that accept people’s prayers. After a special ritual toendorse the sanctity of newly completed idols called “KaiGuang (開光)”, they become avatars of Taoist Gods in thereal world. Though these wooden idols are not Object Gods,
people believe the Gods’ spirits stay inside them, and therefore, treat them respectfully.
A typical way for people to communicate with Gods in
Taoism is to burn incense sticks when they pray. People also
prepare offerings, like fruits or other foods, light incense,
and also burn symbolic prayer money to express their
thankfulness. Another way of communication is throughcharms—a kind of Taoist magic figure. These Taoist charms
come originally from Huang Di (黃帝)’s “Yun Shu (雲書)”.
These magic figures are written by Taoists based on theirobservations of nature. They are not created by Taoists but
can be represented as Gods’ messages to humans. This may
be important in AI ethics, as we can consider developing acommunication system to perceive superintelligent entities’
will and help their decision making become relatively transparent to humans, so that humans will have better sense for
how to interact with AI.
Geng Sen (庚申) is a belief in Taoism that a worm called“San Shi (三尸)” hides inside people’s bodies secretly,recording all their words. Every year on Geng Sen these San

Fig. 1  The religious impact of Taoism on AI and robotics from three different perspectives

13

International Journal of Social Robotics

Shi worms fly to the heavens and report to the Gods about
people’s behaviors [32]. The Geng Sen belief is the foundation of Taoism. People must obey these disciplines, under
the supervision of San Shi worms, otherwise Gods willknow about their misbehaviors. If Superintelligent entities
follow this precedent, they will be able to create an efficientmonitoring system to control human behaviors through highintensity surveillance systems to evaluate daily human performance, something similar to a truly omniscient and more
powerful version of today’s social credit system in China. In
this case, how to create a trustworthy relationship between
humans and the AI will be the main challenge.

4 AI/Robots as a Method of Becoming
Immortals
As a local religion originating from China, Taoism has hadgreat influence in many aspects of science and the arts in
Chinese society through more than two thousand years ofhistory. The Taoist concept of alchemy applies cosmological ideas such as Yin and Yang (陰陽) and the Five Elements or Wuxing (五行), to the process of using iron andother mineral ingredients to make a medicine for eternallife. This is called Waidan (外丹) or “External Alchemy”.
Waidan is similar to European Alchemy in the Middle Ages.
However, while it was popular from the Han dynasty to theTang dynasty, it gradually became unpopular after the Songdynasty.
Modern western medicine categorizes diseases according
to specific disciplines (for example: general medicine, general surgery, neurology, cardiology, urology, etc.), but traditional Chinese medicine treats diseases from a “harmony”
viewpoint. Influenced by Taoism, they see the appearance ofdisease as representing an imbalance in the patient’s body,and the way to cure this is not to focus on a single ailment,
but instead on the harmonization of the universe (body).
Since the Tang dynasty, Waidan has gradually been replaced
by Neidan (內丹) or “Internal Alchemy”. In Waidan, Taoists
use a cauldron to make medicine, but in Neidan the humanbody itself is a cauldron in which Essence, Breath, and Spirit
are cultivated for the purpose of improving physical, emotional and mental health, and ultimately, turned towards thegoal of pursing immortality.
Shen Xian (神仙) thoughts refer to becoming a God or animmortal person via Taoist alchemy like Waidan or Neidan,
as we have mentioned. When it comes to technology, we arestill far away from being able to upload human consciousness to machines. As depicted in the movie “Transcendence”, a more important issue in robotics could be how to
use technology to extend human lifespan or improve ourphysical capabilities, such as cyborg technology [33]. In themeantime, we should be mindful of ethical issues aroundusing this technology. In one case, an Austrian man who lost
both of his arms added two prosthetic arms (one of which hecan control with his brain waves) and used them to handle
the steering wheel of his car. One day when he drove his car,he lost control and crashed, causing his death [34].
One unique aspect of Taoism has to do with immortal
sages, giving people a positive motivation to follow the religion. It seems that cyborg technology could be a more feasible way of reaching this goal of becoming immortal. But,
how do we avoid overusing cyborg technology? Let’s lookat an extreme case. In the Japanese science fiction “Android
Kikaider”, Hakaider implants a live human brain into amechanical body. Can such immortal beings be accepted in
Taoism? It will be necessary to discuss required conditions
for using such a “method,” and whether it contradicts with
the Taoist theory that man is an integral part of nature.

5 AI/Robots as Tools to Assist Humans
In Taoism, people honor Gods by offering food, drinks andfruits. People transmit their wishes to Gods via lighting
incense and also by burning symbolic prayer. There are different Gods who have their own expertise to provide service
to their followers. For example, Wen-Chang (文昌) is theGod of knowledge and wisdom. For students who want topass their college entrance exams, they can attempt to makecontact with Wen-Chang. Ma-Tzu (媽祖) is the Goddessof sea voyages whom sailors usually contact before theirdeparture. The inspiration for AI Utilitarianism in Taoism
may be: what kinds of factors are important when we treat
AI beings as tools for humans?
This kind of viewpoint is the base for AI/Robots becoming human tools supporting them in their daily environments, acting as health aides, social companions or “magicmachines” to realize people’s wishes. If that is the case,
it is not surprising that sometimes idols in Taoist temples
become targets for those who want to express their anger tothe Gods. Idols are where a God’s spirit resides. They are
magic machines created in the God’s physical image for its
believers. In Taiwan, a gambler who stole a God idol cut its
hands and legs and discarded it in a forest in 2015. When he
was arrested, he said he prepared many offerings to the God,
sincerely praying to the God to help him to win money fromhis gambling, but he still lost it all. So, he made a plan toexact revenge towards the God’s inaction towards his wish.
Feng-Shui (風水) is also a crucial factor when we consider robots as tools. Taoism holds that Grotto-heavens andBlessed lands (洞天福地) are sites that have helped Taoists in their religious practice on the way towards becoming
immortals. Feng-Shui is a philosophy of how to choose better living environments for human beings which includes
a set of complex rules and many unspoken rules of thumb13International Journal of Social Robotics

handed down from ancient China. Feng-Shui can be seen asa tool for people to seek out these holy Taoist sites. On theother hand, in our daily life there are also some unwanted
places which are dull or unsafe, such as factories or recycling plants. The existence of these sites is necessary tomaintain the operation of our society, so there must be someone to do tasks there. An innovative way of thinking about
the application of Feng-Shui to robotics is that robots can
be avatars for humans in some unwanted environments. In
other words, robots can help people enhance their quality oflife by replacing at 3D (Dirty, Dull, Dangerous) work environments for humans. This is also a traditional viewpoint inunderstanding the developing relationship between humans
and robots.

6 Taoism and Ethically Aligned Designin HRI
In the previous discussion, we pointed out the religious
impact of Taoism on AI and robots, separated into three different perspectives: as Gods, immortals and tools. The onethat has demands immediate consideration is the use of AI/
robots as human tools, because we are already at the initialstage of social robots entering our societies. Their role ofsupporting humans in healthcare and their daily entertainment is as a kind of tool to ease users’ burdens. Today some
Taoist temples in Hong Kong use humanoid robots to provide result interpretation services of Kau Chim (Divination).
In the past, worshippers relied on the experience of seniorhuman interpreters to read and understand their fortunes.
It’s straightforward, however, to use robotics technology toprovide such a service. Various HRI design factors need tobe considered when AI or robots are used to support users
in this case however. In the future, robots in the religious use
contexts will not only be consulting agents in Divination, but
could also serve in other roles such as social companions
or religious avatars. In all these cases religion and crosscultural issues will gradually become more important for
HRI designers.
The importance of religion and cultural factors to HRI
design is twofold. First, the thinking around design inrobotics technology can be very different depending on thedesigner’s specific religion and cultural background. For
example, “Automata” or mechanical humanoid or animalshaped toys were especially popular in Europe from thesixteenth to the eighteenth centuries. Over a similar time
period (from the seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries),
Japan also had their own style mechanical humanoid toys
called “Karakuri Puppets”, one of the most representative
examples of which is a mechanical doll for tea serving. It
can autonomously transport a cup of tea to the front of theguest, stop and wait until the guest move back the cup on

13

the tray, and then return back to its original place. Although
Automata and Karakuri Puppets are both mechanical toys
for the purpose of entertainment, the thinking behind theirdesign is not exactly the same. Shigeki Sugano argued that
European Automata pursues a realistic approach to presenting action in exact detail from the object it imitates, such
as Jacques de Vaucanson’s Digesting Duck which vividly
reflects the animals’ digesting process. On the other hand,
Japanese Karakuri Puppets pursue another artistic approach,more akin to Noh drama in that its various emotional states
can be presented by simply changing the angle of the mask
[35].
The Taoist definition of human mental health can beunderstood as living with a transcendental point of view,and not finding happiness in things. Additionally, it seeks
to prevent people from reaching extremes by virtue of theirown specific interests or preferred values. It also starts fromthe point of view that human beings are fundamentally apart of nature. Hence we must recognize the relationshipbetween ourselves and the objective nature or external reality. [36] When we apply this Taoist thinking about mental
health to design, we can find an apparent difference in thatrobots shall not only play a role limited to always following
and satisfying human orders and needs. When it’s necessary, robots can limit or refuse a human’s orders for his or
her own good. For example, David feels bored and wants toplay video games. He asks his service robot to connect thechannel for him. However, he has already played the gamefor over 12 hours in the past day, without a rest. In this case,robot needs to disconnect this service for David’s own good,
despite the fact that this against David’s wishes.
Second, religion and cultural factors influence AI governance, especially when it comes to norms that govern
human–robot coexistence. Although many proposed ethicalprinciples and values for AI are universally recognized by
the global community, some ethical values are still developed locally according to unique cultural backgrounds.
These cultural factors matter when we align ethical values
with the design process for autonomous systems, especiallyin designing the interface for human–robot interaction. Now
we attempt to analyze how Taoist religion may influence
designers when aligning AI ethical values for human–robot
interaction. They cover three issues as below:(1) Applying Taoist Ethical Values to Human–Robot Interaction
Yiping Sun commented that the core of Taoist ethics consistsof ethical principles and social norms coming from people’s
beliefs about “Tao”. Though the sources of these principles
and norms are complex and various, in general, they include
four main parts [23]. The nominal goal for Taoist believers
is to become immortal sages, which sounds like an aloof

International Journal of Social Robotics

attitude which exists outside of human society. Actually,
Taoism asks its believers at the beginning of their journeyto have a worldly attitude and to positively practice principles and norms in the society in which they exist in order tokeep a balance between the transcendental and the mundane.
Second, the idea of Cheng Fu (承負) means that one’s goodand evil behaviors will give his descendants corresponding influences in the future. On the other hand, someone
who suffers luck or misfortune can lay blame or praise at
his forefathers’ feet. Third, it encourages people to do goodand discourages people from doing evil via several kindsof Taoist religious disciplines that guide people to behave
well and gradually work towards becoming immortal sages.
Fourth, an ideal ethical relationship in Taoism is to pursue
a harmonization of object and ego to maintain the wider
environmental balance.
When the above mentioned Taoism ethics are applied
to the design process for intelligent robots, they will influence the foundation of human–machine relationships andthe concrete ways that humans and robots interact. The firstexample tells us that AI ethics will still be human-centered,
but that we should not to use a transcendental framework to
define ethical values for a small interest group. In the second
example, Karma in Buddhism is a concept leading adherents
to reflect upon the cause and effect relationship for a specificperson’s fate. However, the thought of Cheng Fu is different
because cause and effect relationship not limited to a specificperson but can cross different generations of a single family.
Due to this difference, Taoist believers’ social acceptance ofAI technology should be greater because the uncertainty andrisks surrounding a machine’s autonomous behaviors could
be defined as a group obligation. In the third example, in
Taiwan some regions have developed a principle of abstaining from killing or eating cattle, because they are seen to beimportant helpers for traditional farmers during the early
agricultural period in Taiwan. If robots’ role in serving
humans becomes crucial, then humans should accordingly
consider special manners for the disposal of broken robots,for example, and not simply casually throwing them into agarbage disposal site. With regard to our last example, weshould also consider the usage of robots from an environmental and ecological context. For example, robots do notneed to rest in order accomplish their tasks. Considering thegoal of a harmonization of the object and ego, Taoism would
prefer to follow a humanitarian principle in their interactions
with robots.
(2) Taoist Culture versus Machine Ethics
In “Zhuangzi (莊子)”, there is a famous debate on whether
one can know the joy a fish experiences: Zhuangzi and
Huizi were enjoying themselves on the bridge over the Hao
River. Zhuangzi said, “The minnows are darting about freeand easy! This is how fish are happy.” Huizi replied, “Youare not a fish. How do you know that the fish are happy?”
Zhuangzi said, “You are not I. How do you know that I do
not know that the fish are happy?” Huizi said, “I am notyou, to be sure, so of course I don’t know about you. But
you obviously are not a fish; so, the case is complete thatyou do not know that the fish are happy.” Zhuangzi said,“Let’s go back to the beginning of this. You said: How do
you know that the fish are happy; but in asking me this,
you already knew that I know it. I know it right here above
the Hao.” For robot ethics research, we are eager to know
when and whether robots have self-awareness, but following this story, suppose someday we heard news about aself-aware robot that has been created. We may wonder, isthe robot self-aware to all observers, or, do we alone knowthat the robot is self-aware?
Accompanying the growth of the range of services provided and the growing level of machine autonomy, we willneed to authorize some spaces for machines outside of theloop of human control in order to make their decisions as
they perform their duties. This emerging field is called“Machine Ethics” [37]. However, the state-of-the-art ofmachine ethics remains far from creating real “ethicalrobots” or “robots who can perform behaviors or makedecisions ethically from humans’ observation” [38], something similar to John Searle’s “Chinese Room Argument”[39] or what is known as “weak AI”. Even so, it alreadyhas potential demands in the field of safety critical AI
systems, such as the German Ministry of Transportation’s
proposal for using a Code of Ethics for self-driving cars on
public roads [26]. Furthermore, Michael and Susan Andersons also propose using care robots built with machine
ethics for educating children about what things are ethicaland are not [40].
With regard to the implementation of machine ethics,
many critical challenges still exist. According to IEEE’s
Ethically Aligned Design, one general issue around “NormImplementing” is to discuss the pros and cons of TopDown (where the system has some symbolic representationof its activity), Bottom-Up (where the system builds up an
understanding through experiences of what is to be considered ethical or unethical in certain situations), and Hybrid
Approaches (where action selection can be carried out by
sub-symbolic system, and add a symbolic gateway or “ethical governor” to control the situation) [16].
The other issue which “Norm Selection” concerns has
to do with which kind of ethical principles we choose for
artificial moral agents to follow. Imagine there are a groupof elderly people and another group of young people insidea bus. When the bus arrives at the terminal how do we
decide the order in which they should disembark from thebus? In Asian society, young people are taught to respectelderly people. So, if we were to follow Immanuel Kant’s

13International Journal of Social Robotics

Deontological Ethics it sounds like elderly people shouldhave priority to get off the bus. On the other hand, if we
adopt Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarianism then young people
should get off the bus first, because their actions are fasterthan the elderly. It saves more time for the total passengers
if elderly people wait for young people.
Compared to Norm Implementing, Norm Selection isa highly culturally sensitive issue, especially in termsof the ethical norms of Taoism. Embedding the ethical values of Taoism into autonomous systems is aboutmachine perception. How can machines tell if their current situation (or state) needs the application of theirembedded ethical decision functions? Or how else canthey detect whether any allowable or unallowable norms
exist in its local environments (the real world)? This isa key issue for applying machine ethics, because evena robot with sound norm selection and norm implementing mechanisms may still not able to do such ethical reasoning if it misunderstands its situation. Let’stake a robotic guide dog for example. Suppose a blind
person uses a robotic guide dog to take him cross theroad. When they are still waiting for the traffic light tochange from red to green, say the blind person makes awrong guess and allows the dog to guide him across theroad right away. In this situation, the robotic guide dog
should have a kind of reasoning mechanism to enable it
to make an “intelligent decision to disobey” its humanmaster. That said, a prerequisite for the guide dog is tocorrectly understand its current situation (they are ina corner of the crossroads waiting for the traffic lightto turn green) and relevant deontological norms (roadsigns and traffic lights). In this case, the concept of a
Taoist charm can be a way for formatting vision-based
norms and easing the complexity of the perception ofmachine ethics.
Ancient Chinese Taoists believe that charms are
the foundation of the five numerologies (五術). Taoist
charms are regarded as a kind of media for Taoists tocommunicate with the heaven, and these magic figures
are written by Taoists from their observation from thenature. They are not created by Taoists, but can be seen
as as Gods’ messages to humans. In the past, these Taoist charms were not only used as medical treatment forpatients, but also believed to have the magical power totrigger natural spirts’ action or inaction. One extreme
example is from Hong Kong’s famous zombie movies in
the 90s. In one movie, a zombie was suddenly stopped
in its tracks when someone pasted a Taoist charm onto
its forehead. To many Taoist believers, a Taoist charmis a kind of instruction to warn non-human spirits aboutsomething that they should or shouldn’t do. Because
these people are Taoist believers they already have psychological expectations that make these figures a normal

13

Fig. 2  A robot is waiting for traffic light at an experiment in the
Tsukuba robotic special zone

feature of their daily lives. If we borrow this idea todevelop a common symbol system for human and robots,then these “visualized norms” from Taoism can be one
solution to reduce the complexity and uncertainty formachine ethics in their initial stage (Fig. 2).
(3) From Fuzzy Thinking to Electronic Personhood
In recent years cases have been reported around the worldof people projecting their empathy on to robots when robots
are mistreated by someone [41, 42] or users feel a special
emotion of likeness and dependence when robots accompanied them for a long period of time [43, 44]. In 2015, there
was a case where an inebriated person ran into a Softbank
shop and attacked an innocent humanoid Pepper robot. Many
people thought that the drunk individual should be sued
for its injury to the robot, but not for damage to property
under the Japanese Penal Code [45]. This response showsa potential gap between “to be” and “ought to be” when we
define robots as tools. Although this kind of attitude towards
robots will be influenced by different social and religious
concerns in many societies, in the end the legal system may
consider assigning a proper legal status to robots somedayin the future.
The European Parliament is the world’s first legal bodyto consider creating an independent “Electronic Personhood”
status for sophisticated autonomous robots having a status aselectronic persons with specific rights and obligations, including “making good any damage they may cause, and applying electronic personality to cases where robots make smart
autonomous decisions or otherwise interact with third parties
independently” [46]. However, many discussions currently
hold a conservative position with regard to the EU’s proposal,
including the IEEE’s Ethically Aligned Design, because it is
an attempt to break the long-stable order between the “subject” and “object” of the law. Suppose robots become a legal
subject: in this case, then, who should afford responsibility
for the decisions made by these entities? On the other hand,International Journal of Social Robotics

if we insist that robots remain in the category of property or
things from a legal perspective, than their capability of performing autonomous behaviors will always challenge their
human keepers’ obligation for maintenance and management,
thus causing an accountability gap.
Philosophical Dualism is rooted as a core part of Christian western societies. In the seventeenth century, René
Descartes’ “Mind–Body Dualism” recognized humanity’s
unique existence apart from other animals [47]. From the
mid-twentieth century, the dualism of zero and one has been
the foundation for developing modern computers and cybernetics. Though computer states can be represented based onzero and one—as yes or no, respectively—human perception is not like this. In order to solve this problem, Lotfi A.
Zadeh proposed his famous “Fuzzy Logic”, which helps torepresent the gray zone for many daily applications of control theory, including train brake controls or the temperature
control of air conditioning units [48].
Fuzzy Logic is like a harmonization between Yin (陰) andYang (陽), which are the two extremes for Taoism. We may
say such wisdom comes from the East and can be helpful insolving something that might be regarded as a dead end from
Dualism’s point of view. One such possibility is applying the
Taoist way of thinking to the issue of Electronic Personhoodand to consider creating a gray zone between the object andthe subject of law, or as we mentioned in previous section,
the “Third Existence” [28]. If we refer to humans as theFirst Existence, which is a status that can claim rights andconfers responsibility, then artificial things and non-humananimals are the Second Existence that is a passive status andonly can receive consequences of rights and responsibility.
Naturally, there will be a status in between that we need fora non-conscious, but autonomous robot.
A concrete way of applying Third Existence towards
designing robot sociability includes, but is not limited to,the following two possibilities. The first is to go through acase study of the robot that is involved in a specific incident
and authorize a professional committee to judge whether
all the “characteristics” that were collected from that robot
amount to proof of a legal subject or legal object. Take thecase of Pepper the robot as an example [45]. If the committee found that Pepper is a machine which perform its
actions without a high or even medium level of sentience,then their decision might likely be to judge it as merely alegal object. Although this approach is flexible as robots
begin to enter human society, it will become a problem toperform such case-by-case judgments if the number of suchrobots become “considerable” in the overall market. At thisstage, we may refer to Takashi Izumo’s “Digital Peculium”
or Digital Specific Property. It’s an idea that borrows fromthe Roman slaves’ Peculium status and transferred into intelligent robots in order to secure the robot master’s liability
arising from the economic activities carried out by his or

her robots, to be distributed between the robot owners andtheir contract partners [49]. When compared to the European
Parliament’s Electronic Personhood (EP), Digital Peculium(DP) is a specific status for robots beyond their position asproperty, but not yet at the higher position of somethingequivalent to humans. In other words, they are not able toreceive rights or afforded responsibilities under DP, but theiractions are more accountable because an independent economic account is affiliated with their Digital Peculium. Thisis a good example of a third existence.

7 Conclusion
Culture and religion is a deep and meaningful topic forsocial robotics. From the point of view of religion, we can
explain why Christian-leaning Western societies are threatened by the existence of robots. Terminator or Frankenstein
imagery suggests that robots are a threat to humans. On theother hand, the Animism of Japan’s Shinto religion led tothe creation of the characters Atom Boy or Doraemon, which
are not viewed as a threat. In addition, religion is importantto the normative development of ethics and law to robots.
In this article, we choose the relatively unexplored topic of
Taoism as our subject of study, and then proceed to analyze Taoism’s religious impacts on human–robot interaction. We sketched the potential religious impact of Taoism
on AI and robotics and found that it can be classified fromthree different perspectives: as superior existence akin togods; as a method for becoming immortals; and as tools
to assist humans. With a central focus on the third impact,
AI and Robots as tools to assist humans, we referred to theIEEE’s Ethically Aligned Design principles and discussed
the connection with the design of human–robot interaction
along with a focus on how Taoist ethical factors influence
this design. When designing AI and autonomous systems,
we should ensure that the behaviors of robots will not violate human value systems. Religion as a collective belief
in society has at least the same importance as other social
values like ethics, law, and safety. The religious impacts of
Taoism on HRI will be important when we begin to design
robot sociability. The next steps for this research can be toestablish religion as a sub-field of culturally-aware robotics,
by defining its theoretical background and its most relevantgoals in today’s fast-changing, culturally diverse world.
Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Mr. Christopher Benek
and Prof. Shuzhi Sam Ge for their helpful suggestions.

Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict ofinterest.

13International Journal of Social Robotics

References
1. Weng Y-H (2018) Robot Law 1.0: on social system design for artificial intelligence. In: Barfield W, Pagallo U et al (eds) Researchhandbook of law and artificial intelligence. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham
2. Sakura O (2018) Socio-cultural shaping of AI/robots in the East
Asia. In: The 19th FRIS seminar, 2018-07-10, Tohoku University
3. Golem. Wikipedia. https​://en.wikip​edia.org/wiki/Golem​
4. Morris N (2007) The Golem in Jewish American Literature: risks
and responsibilities in the fiction of thane rosenbaum. Peter Lang,New York, p 119
5. Hero of Alexandria. Wikipedia. https​://en.wikip​edia.org/wiki/
Hero_of_Alexa​ndria​
6. Lesley A (2017) Can a robot be religious? World religion news.
https​://www.world​relig​ionne​ws.com/relig​ion-news/can-robot​-relig​ious
7. Siciliano L (2017) A Japanese company just unveiled a robot
priest that will read scriptures at Buddhist funerals. http://uk.busin​
essin​sider​.com/japan​ese-compa​ny-unvei​led-robot​-pries​t-techn​ology​-peppe​r-soft-bank-robot​ics-relig​ion-2017-8
8. Weng Y-H (2016) One being for two origins: a new perspective on
roboethics. Robohub. http://roboh​ub.org/one-being​-for-two-origi​
ns-a-new-persp​ectiv​e-on-roboe​thics​/
9. Crosbie J (2017) This religion is the first to say sex robots area sin. Inverse. https​://www.inver​se.com/artic​le/33751​-sex-robot​
s-islam​-chris​tiani​ty-relig​ion
10. Cargo Cult. Wikipedia. https​://en.wikip​edia.org/wiki/Cargo​_cult
11. Mims C (2010) Why Japanese love robots (and Americans
fear them), MIT Technology Review. https​://www.techn​ology​
revie​ w.com/s/42118 ​ 7 /why-japan ​ e se-love-robot ​ s -and-ameri​cans-fear-them/
12. Robertson J (2017) Robo sapiens japanicus robots, gender, family,
and the Japanese Nation. University of California Press, Berkeley
13. Kaplan F (2004) Who is afraid of the humanoid? Investigating
cultural differences in the acceptance of robots. Int J Humanoid
Robot 1(3):465–480
14. Takanishi A (2016) Humanoid robotics, culture and society ofJapan. In: Zielińska T, Zieliński C (eds) Romansy 16, vol 487.
CISM courses and lectures. Springer, Vienna
15. Nomura T, Syrdal DS, Dautenhahn K (2015) Differences on social
acceptance of humanoid robots between Japan and the UK. In:
4th international symposium on new frontiers in human–robot
interaction, Canterbury, UK
16. The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Autonomous and Intelligent Systems (2017) Ethically aligned design: a version forprioritizing human well-being with autonomous and intelligent
systems, Version 2. IEEE
17. Liezi: Chapter 5 Tang wen
18. Laozi (4th century BC) Tao Te Ching
19. Zhuang Zhou (3rd century BC) Zhuangzi
20. Gan Ji (2nd century BC) Tai Ping Ching
21. Pengzhi L (2000) Taoism philosophy. Wen Jin Press, Taipei
22. Needham J et al (1990) Science and civilization in China, vol 2.
Science and Technology Press, Beijing
23. Sun Y(2008) Taoism’s belief and thoughts. Dong Da Press, Taipei
24. Weng Y-H, Hirata Y (2018) Ethically aligned design for assistive
robotics. In: IEEE international conference on intelligence andsafety for robotics, Shenyang, China
25. Bostrom N (2014) Superintelligence: paths, dangers, strategies.
Oxford University Press, Oxford
26. BMVI (2017) Ethics Commission on automated driving presents report. German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital
infrastructure

13

27. Asimov I (1950) Robot. Ghome Press, New York
28. Weng Y-H, Chen C-H, Sun C-T (2009) Toward the human–robot
co-existence society: on safety intelligence for next generation
robots. Int J Soc Robot 1(4):267–282
29. Tallin J (2018) On steering the AI. In: The 14th FRIS seminar,
2017-09-10, Tohoku University
30. Kubo N (2000) The gods in Taoism. Heika Press, Tokyo
31. Hari-Kuyo. Wekipedia. https​://en.wikip​edia.org/wiki/Hari-Kuyō
32. Kubo N (1962) The study on Kou Shin beliefs. Hara Press, Tokyo
33. Barfield W (2015) Cyber-humans: our future with machines.
Springer, Switzerland
34. Unknown editorial (2010) Robotic arm man Christian Kandlbauer
dies in hospital after crash. The Guardian
35. Sugano S (2011) Dreams that people saw, the way the robot came:from Greek myths and Atoms. JIPM-S, Tokyo
36. Yip K-S (2004) Taoism and its impact on mental health of theChinese communities. Int J Soc Psychiatry 50(1):25–42
37. Wallach W, Allen C (2010) Moral machines: teaching robots rightfrom wrong. Oxford University Press, Oxford
38. Anderson M, Anderson SL (2018) A prima facie duty approachto machine ethics: machine learning of features of ethical dilemmas, prima facie duties, and principles through a dialogue withethicists. In: Anderson M, Anderson SL (eds) machine ethics.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
39. Searle J (1980) Minds, brains, and programs. Behav Brain Sci
3(3):417–457
40. Anderson M, Anderson SL, Luo D, Weng Y-H (2018) Ethics
and care robots. PKU-Berggruen AI Salon, 2018-11-22, Berggruen Institute China Center and Peking University Education
Foundation
41. Salvini P, Ciaravella G, Yu W, Ferri G, Manzi A, Mazzolai B,
Laschi C, Oh S-R, Dario P (2010) How safe are service robots inurban environments? Bullying a robot. In: Paper presented on the2010 IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN’10). Viareggio, Italy
42. Kanda T, Ishiguro H (2017) Human–robot interaction in social
robotics. CRC Press, New York43. Thang LL (2018) Before we give them fuzzy robots, let’s try solving elderly loneliness with people, 2018-12-02, QUARTZ, https:​ //qz.com/149060​ 5/before​ -we-give-them-fuzzy-​ robots​ -lets-try-solvi​
ng-elder​ly-lonel​iness​-with-peopl​e/
44. Unknown Editorial (2015) Hitchhiking robot is decapitated andleft in a ditch after just two weeks. IFLSCIENCE, https​://www.
iflsci​ ence.​ com/techno​ logy/​ hitchh​ iking​ -robot-​ manage​ s-two-weeks​-us-being​-destr​oyed/
45. Love D (2015) A drunk man’s assault on a robot raises unusual
legal issues. The Daily Dot, 10.06.2015
46. Delvaux M et al (2016) DRAFT REPORT with recommendations to the commission on civil law rules on robotics. European
Parliament
47. Mind-Body Problem. Wikipedia. https​://en.wikip​edia.org/wiki/
Mind–body_probl​em
48. Fuzzy Logic. Wikipedia. https​://en.wikip​edia.org/wiki/Fuzzy​_logic​49. Izumo T (2018) Digital specific property of robots: a historicalsuggestion from Roman Law, vol 1, issue 1, Delphi—interdisciplinary review of emerging technologies
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard tojurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

International Journal of Social Robotics
Yueh‑Hsuan Weng is an AssistantProfessor at FRIS, Tohoku University, a Visiting Scientist at the
RIKEN Center for AdvancedIntelligence Project in Tokyo,
Japan and a TTLF Fellow at
Stanford Law School. He
received his Ph.D. in Law from
Peking University, China. He has
been appointed as Visiting
Assistant Professor for Facultyof Law at The University ofHong Kong (2018), Research
Associate, Peking University
Law School (2010-2014). He isstrongly interested in interdisciplinary studies, especially in issues concerning the interface between
Artificial Intelligence and Law, including Robot Law, Social Robotics,
and Legal Informatics.
Yasuhisa Hirata is a Professor in
the Department of Robotics at
Tohoku University, Sendai,
Japan. He received the BE, ME
and PhD degrees in mechanicalengineering from Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan in 1998,
2000 and 2004, respectively. His
Research interests include intelligent control of multiple mobile
robots in coordination, human–robot cooperation system, Assistive Robot and Haptics. He is amember of IEEE, RSJ, SICE andJSME.

Osamu Sakura is a Professor at
the Interfaculty Initiative inInformation Studies, Universityof Tokyo and a Team Leader at
the RIKEN Center for AdvancedIntelligence Project in Tokyo,
Japan. He received his PhD in
1992 from Kyoto University,
Japan, by behavioral ecology ofwild chimpanzees in West
Africa. After finishing doctoral
thesis, he had shifted his field torather historical and philosophical areas, especially on thereception of sociobiologicalideas in Japan. His recent activities include AI & culture, popularization and education of sciences.
Yusuke Sugahara is an Associate
Professor in the Department of
Mechanical Engineering at
Tokyo Institute of Technology(Tokyo Tech), Japan. He
received his PhD in 2006 fromWaseda University. Before hejoined the faculty of Tokyo Tech,he had served as a Research
Associate at Waseda University(2003-2007), an Assistant Professor at Tohoku University(2007-2012), and a Full-time
Lecturer at Kokushikan University (2012-2015). His researchinterests include design and control of mechanical and robotic systems.

13