Reflecting on the Personality of Artificiality: Reading Asimov’s Film Bicentennial Man through Machine Ethics

Open access


The film Bicentennial Man (1999) pictured in a nutshell a robot who/that became human via his personality by plunging into the realities of freedom and death. The aim of this paper is to reflect on the notion of personality in the case of what this paper coins as a ‘robot-incarnate’ with the name Andrew, the first man who lived for two hundred years from his inception as an artificial machine. The method of exposition proceeds from (1) utilizing a philosophical reflection on the film concerning the determinacy of Andrew as a person and (2) then anchoring his case as a subject for the understanding of machine ethics. Regarding the first, the paper focuses on the questions of personality, death, and freedom. Regarding the second, the paper exposes the discussions of machine ethics and the issue of moral agency. Deducing from the already existing literature on the matter, the paper concludes that machine ethics must stand as the principle that serves as law and limitation to any scientific machine advancement showing promising potentials.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Allué S. (2003). Blurring Posthuman Identities: the New Version of Humanity Offered by Bicentennial Man (1999). Odisea 4 17-30.

  • Anderson S.L. (2016) Asimov’s “Three Laws of Robotics” and Machine Metaethics. Science Fiction and Philosophy: From Time Travel to Superintelligence second edition. Wiley.

  • Armstrong S. (2014). Smarter Than Us: The Rise of Machine Intelligence. USA: Machine Intelligence Research Institute.

  • Asimov I. (1976). The Bicentennial Man and Other Stories. US: Double day.

  • Asimov I. & Silverberg R. (1992). The Positronic Man. UK: Gollancz.

  • Bendel O. (2017). Sex Robots from the Perspective of Machine Ethics. In Love and Sex with Robots. Second International Conference LSR 2016 London UK Revised Selected Papers (Cheok A.D.; Devlin K.; Levy D. (Eds.) 17-26.

  • Brundage M. (2014). Limitations and Risks of Machine Ethics. In Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence 26(3).

  • Castro J. (2016). A Bottom-Up Approach to Machine Ethics. DOI:

  • Clarke R. (2011). Asimov’s Laws of Robotics: Implications for Information Technology. In In Machine Ethics. (Anderson M. Anderson S.L. Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Cook J.C. (2007). Machine and Metaphor: The Ethics of Language in American Realism (Cain W. ed.). In Literary Criticism and Cultural Theory. Routledge.

  • Cuthbertson A. (2018). Meet Norman The ‘Psychopath AI’ That’s Here to Teach us a Lesson. Independent. Retrieved from

  • Edgar S. (2003). Morality and Machines: Perspectives on Computer Ethics. Second Edition. Sudbury Massachusetts: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

  • Gunkel D. (2012). The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI Robots and Ethics. London England: The MIT Press.

  • Haidt J. and Graham. J. (2007). When Morality Opposes Justice: Conservatives Have Moral Intuitions That Liberals May Not Recognize. Social Justice Research 20(1) 98–116.

  • International Federation of Robotics IFR (2016). World Robotics 2016. Frankfurt: International Federation of Robotics.

  • Jiji (2017). Softbank upgrades humanoid robot Peper. The Japan Times. Retrieved from

  • Knobe J. (2003). Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language. Analysis 63(3) 190–194.

  • Koenigs M. Young L. Adolphs R. Tranel D. Cushman F. Hauser M. and Damasio. A. (2007). Damage to the Prefrontal Cortex Increases Utilitarian Moral Judgements. Nature 446(7138) 908–911.

  • Kurzweil R. (1999). The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence. England: Viking Penguin.

  • Kurzweil R. (2012). How to Create a Mind: The Secret of Human Thought Revealed. London: Penguin.

  • Lumbreras S. (2017). The Limits of Machine Ethics. Religions 8(100) 1-10.

  • Murray H.A. (1938). Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Ong T. (2017). Pepper the robot is now a Buddhist priest programmed to chant at Funerals. The Verge. Retrieved from

  • Pereira L. M. Saptawijaya A. (2016). Programme Machine Ethics. In Studies in Applied Philosophy Epistemology and Rational Ethics vol. 26. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

  • Shulman C. H. Jonsson N. Tarleton (2009). Machine Ethics and Superintelligence. In AP-CAP 2009: The Fifth Asia-Pacific Computing and Philosophy Conference October 1st-2nd University of Tokyo Japan Proceedings edited by Carson Reynolds and Alvaro Cassinelli 95–97.

  • Shulman C. N. Tarleton H. Jonsson (2009). Which Consequentialism? Machine Ethics and Moral Divergence. In AP-CAP 2009: The Fifth Asia-Pacific Computing and Philosophy Conference October 1st-2nd University of Tokyo Japan Proceedings edited by Carson Reynolds and Alvaro Cassinelli 23–25.

  • Strack S. (2005). Handbook of Personology and Psychopathology. Wiley

  • Sullins J. (2011). When is a Robot a Moral Agent? In Machine Ethics. (Anderson M. Anderson S.L. Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Veruggio G Operto F. and Bekey G. (2016). Roboethics: Social and ethical implications. In Springer Handbook of Robotics. Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer pp. 2135–60.

  • Warren M. A. (1973). On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion. The Monist 57(1).

  • Yudkowsky E. (2008). Artificial Intelligence as a Positive and Negative Factor in Global Risk. In Global Catastrophic Risks edited by Nick Bostrom and Milan M. Ćirković (pp. 308–345). New York: Oxford University Press.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 192 192 14
PDF Downloads 82 82 10