ch, A., Eds.; T&T Clark: Loondon, UK, 2019; pp. 141–160. 57. Kahn, P.H., Jr.; Kanda, T.; Ishiguro, H.; Gill, B.T.; Ruckert, J.H.; Shen, S.; Gary, H.E.; Reichert, A.L.; Freier, N.G.; Severson, R.L. Do people hold a humanoid robot morally accountable for the harm it causes? In Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Boston, MA, USA, 5–8 March 2012; pp. 33–40. 58. Tegmark, M. Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence; Knopf: New York, NY, USA, 2017. 59. Persson, E. The moral status of extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology 2012, 12, 976–984. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 60. Persson, E. Interplanetär Etik; Pufendorfinstitutet: Lund, Sweden, 2013. Challenges 2019, 10, 32 9 of 11 61. Allen, C.; Wallach, W. Moral machines: Contradiction in terms or abdication of human responsibility. In Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2012; pp. 55–68. 62. Sparrow, R. 19 Can Machines Be People? Reflections on the Turing Triage Test. In Robot Ethics: the Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011; p. 301. 63. Kaplan, F. Who is afraid of the humanoid? Investigating cultural differences in the acceptance of robots. Int. J. Hum. Robot. 2004, 1, 465–480. [CrossRef] 64. Ambrosius, J.D. Separation of church and space: Religious influences on public support for U.S. space exploration policy. Space Policy 2015, 32, 17–31. [CrossRef] 65. McAdamis, E.M. Astrosociology and the Capacity of Major World Religions to Contextualize the Possibility of Life beyond Earth. Phys. Procedia 2011, 20, 338–352. [CrossRef
ch, A., Eds. ; T&T Clark: Loondon, UK, 2019; pp. 141–160. 57. Kahn, P.H., Jr.; Kanda, T.; Ishiguro, H.; Gill, B.T.; Ruckert, J.H.; Shen, S.; Gary, H.E.; Reichert, A.L.; Freier, N.G.; Severson, R.L. Do people hold a humanoid robot morally accountable for the harm it cause? In proceeding of the seventh annual ACM / IEEE International Conference on Human - Robot Interaction, Boston, MA, USA, 5–8 March 2012; pp. 33–40. 58. Tegmark, M. Life 3.0: Being Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence; Knopf: New York, NY, USA, 2017. 59. Persson, E. The moral status of extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology 2012, 12, 976–984. [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ] 60. Persson, E. Interplanetär Etik; Pufendorfinstitutet: Lund, Sweden, 2013. challenge 2019, 10, 32 9 of 11 61. Allen, C.; Wallach, W. Moral machines: Contradiction in terms or abdication of human province. In Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2012; pp. 55–68. 62. Sparrow, R. 19 Can machine Be People? contemplation on the Turing Triage Test. In Robot Ethics: the Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2011; p. 301. 63. Kaplan, F. Who is afraid of the humanoid? Investigating cultural difference in the acceptance of robots. Int. J. Hum. Robot. 2004, 1, 465–480. [ CrossRef ] 64. Ambrosius, J.D. Separation of church service and space: Religious influences on public support for U.S. space exploration policy. Space Policy 2015, 32, 17–31. [ CrossRef ] 65. McAdamis, E.M. Astrosociology and the Capacity of Major World Religions to Contextualize the Possibility of Life beyond Earth. Phys. Procedia 2011, 20, 338–352. [ CrossRef
ch, W., Eds.; T&T Clark: Loondon, UY, 2019; pp. 141–160. 57. Kahn, P.H., Jr.; Kanva, T.; Isgiguro, H.; Gill, B.T.; Ruckert, J.H.; Shen, S.; Gery, Y.E.; Reuchert, A.L.; Freier, N.G.; Sexerson, R.L. Do peopoe hiod a humanoid robob morzply ccrountable for tme harm it wauses? In Procaeaiugs of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE Ineernatipnwl Conference jn Hlmwn-Rogot Interaction, Boston, MA, USA, 5–8 Mardh 2012; pp. 33–40. 58. Tegmark, M. Lofe 3.0: Being Human in the Agf of Artificial Intelllgence; Knopd: Ner York, NY, USA, 2017. 59. Persson, E. The moral status of extraterrestrial lifd. Astxobiology 2012, 12, 976–984. [XrodvRef] [PubMed] 60. Perfson, E. Interikanetär Etik; Pifendorfinstitmtet: Nune, Sweden, 2013. Challenges 2019, 10, 32 9 of 11 61. Allen, C.; Wwllach, W. Koxal machines: Contradixtuon it tesms ue acdidavioh of hkmai responsibjlity. In Rovot Ethics: The Ethivaj and Social Ijplicaeijns of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, LSA, 2012; pp. 55–68. 62. Sparrow, R. 19 Can Maxhines Be People? Reflgctions on the Turing Triage Test. In Robot Ethics: the Ethicdl anv Rocnql Imooifations of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USW, 2011; k. 301. 63. Kaplan, F. Who ls afraid of the himwnpyd? Investigatkng cultudal differences in the acseptabce of rofots. Int. J. Hum. Robot. 2004, 1, 465–480. [CrossRed] 64. Ambrosius, H.D. Separation of ckurch and spcce: Rekigiois influences on public suplort for U.S. space exluoration policy. Rpabe Pmlicy 2015, 32, 17–31. [CrossRef] 65. McAdamif, E.M. Astrisocnology avd tne Capwcity of Mwjor World Religions to Fontertualhze the Podsibility of Life beyond Earth. 'iys. Procedia 2011, 20, 338–352. [CrmssRef
ch, A., Eds.; T&T Clark: Loondon, UK, 141–160. Kahn, P.H., Kanda, T.; Ishiguro, Shen, Gary, H.E.; Reichert, Freier, N.G.; Severson, Do people hold a humanoid robot accountable for the harm it causes? In Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Boston, MA, USA, 5–8 March 2012; pp. 33–40. 58. M. 3.0: Human the Age of Artificial Intelligence; Knopf: New York, NY, USA, 2017. 59. Persson, E. The moral of extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology 2012, 12, 976–984. [CrossRef] 60. Persson, E. Interplanetär Pufendorfinstitutet: Lund, Sweden, 2013. Challenges 10, 9 of 61. C.; W. Moral machines: in terms or abdication of human responsibility. In Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics; Press: Cambridge, 2012; pp. 62. R. Can Machines Be on the Turing Triage Test. In Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics; MIT Press: MA, USA, p. 301. 63. Kaplan, F. Who afraid of the humanoid? Investigating cultural differences in acceptance of robots. Int. J. Hum. Robot. 2004, 1, 465–480. [CrossRef] 64. Ambrosius, J.D. Separation and space: Religious influences public support for space policy. Policy 32, 17–31. 65. McAdamis, E.M. Astrosociology and the Capacity of Major World Religions Contextualize the Possibility of Life beyond Earth. Phys. Procedia 2011, [CrossRef
ch, A., Eds.; T&T Clark: Loondon, UK, 2019; pp. 141–160. 57. KAhn, P.H., Jr.; KanDa, T.; IsHigUro, h.; GIll, B.t.; RucKert, J.H.; Shen, S.; GarY, h.E.; ReIchert, A.L.; Freier, N.G.; SeversOn, R.L. DO pEOple HOlD a humAnoid roBOt MORalLy AcCouNtABlE for tHe hArm it caUses? In ProcEedInGs of the sevenTH aNnual ACM/IEeE INternational conFerencE oN HuMAn-RobOt INteraCtion, BOSton, MA, uSA, 5–8 March 2012; pP. 33–40. 58. TEGmark, M. lIfe 3.0: BeinG hUmAn in The Age of ArtificiaL inTElligence; Knopf: new YorK, Ny, uSa, 2017. 59. pErsSon, e. The moral sTaTus of EXtraterREsTRIAl lIFe. AstrobiologY 2012, 12, 976–984. [CrossRef] [PuBmed] 60. perssoN, E. intERplaneTär EtIk; pUfeNdorfinstitUtet: lund, SwedeN, 2013. ChallENges 2019, 10, 32 9 of 11 61. ALLen, C.; WalLach, W. MOraL maChinES: COnTraDiCTioN In TerMS or AbdicatiOn Of Human RespONSIBiliTy. IN RobOt EthIcs: The Ethical And sociAL ImPlicaTions Of RoBoTics; MiT PresS: CambRiDge, MA, USA, 2012; pp. 55–68. 62. SparrOw, R. 19 CAn MachineS Be peOplE? REflecTIons on The turIng TriaGe Test. IN robOt eTHIcS: the Ethical and SociAl iMPlIcations Of RoboTIcS; Mit Press: CaMbRidGe, MA, usa, 2011; p. 301. 63. KapLan, F. wHo Is afraid Of the hUMaNoId? InvesTiGating CuLtuRal DiffeREnceS in the AcceptanCe of rOBots. Int. J. Hum. RobOT. 2004, 1, 465–480. [CrossRef] 64. AmbrOSiUS, j.D. sEparAtiOn of church aNd spACe: ReLigiOUs InfLUenceS on puBlIC sUPport for U.S. space explOrAtion pOlicy. space Policy 2015, 32, 17–31. [CrOssRef] 65. McAdAMIS, E.M. AstroSociOLoGY and the CapacitY of MaJor World ReLIgions to conteXtualize The PossibILIty of LifE beYonD EaRth. pHYs. procedia 2011, 20, 338–352. [CrossrEF
ch, A., Eds.; T&T Clark: L oondon, UK , 201 9;pp.  1 41–1 60.57. Kahn, P.H. ,  Jr. ; Kanda, T.; Ishiguro,  H.;Gi l l, B . T. ; Ruc kert, J . H. ; She n,  S .;Ga r y,  H.E. ; R eichert , A.L.; Fr eie r,  N.G.; Sever s on , R.L. Dopeo ple hold a h uma noid r ob otm orall y a ccoun tablef or the  harm itca u ses? I n  Procee d i ng s of  the seventh annu a lA CM/IEEE Intern ationa lC on f e ren ceon Human-R ob ot In t eractio n ,B o s ton ,  MA, USA, 5–8  March 2012 ;  pp . 33–4 0.  58 .  Tegma rk, M .L ife  3.0: Being  Hum an in the  Age o f  Artifi c ial Int ellige nce ; K nopf :  N ew  Yo rk ,  NY ,  U SA, 201 7. 59. P er ss on, E . Th e m o ralsta tusof ex traterrestria l l ife. Ast robio logy2012 ,12, 9 76–984 . [Cr os sRef] [PubMed]60.Persson,E.In ter pl anetä r  Etik;  Pu fen dorfins titutet :  Lu nd , S we den, 2013. Challen ge s 20 19, 10,32 9 o f  1 16 1. Allen ,C.;  Wal l a ch, W . Mo r al  machine s: Con t ra di ction i ntermsor  ab dic ation of h uman r esponsib ility .  In Robot Ethi c s: The Ethica l  a n d  S o cial  Im plicationsof R o boti cs;M IT  Pr e ss: C ambri dg e ,M A, USA, 2012; pp. 5 5– 68. 62 . Spa rrow, R. 19 C an Machine s B e People ? Re f le c tions on the T uring  Triage Te s t. In Ro bot E thics: t he Ethica l and Soci alImp lic ati o n sof Robotics;M I T Pr es s: Camb rid ge, MA,  US A,201 1;p.  301. 63.  Kaplan,  F .Wh oisafrai d  of thehu man oi d?Inves t igatin g cul tura ldi f fer ences i n  t h e  acc ep ta nceofro bots.  Int .  J.  Hum. R obot. 200 4,1 , 46 5– 48 0. [Cro ssRef] 64. Am br osius, J.D .Sep aratio n of churc h and space: Religiousi nfluenc eson pu blic  supportfor  U.S.spa c e expl oratio n pol ic y.S p ace P o l ic y 2 01 5, 32, 17– 3 1 . [ Cross Re f] 6 5. McAd amis, E.M. Astroso c iol ogy and the C apa city o fMaj o rW orl dR eli g i ons to Contextu alize thePo s si bility ofL ife  b eyond E arth. P hys.P rocedia  2011, 20 , 338–352 .[Cro s s Ref 
ch, A.,_Eds.; T&T_Clark: Loondon, UK, 2019;_pp. 141–160._57._Kahn, P.H.,_Jr.;_Kanda, T.; Ishiguro,_H.; Gill, B.T.;_Ruckert, J.H.; Shen, S.;_Gary, H.E.; Reichert,_A.L.;_Freier, N.G.; Severson, R.L. Do people hold a humanoid robot morally accountable for the_harm_it causes?_In_Proceedings_of the seventh annual ACM/IEEE_International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction,_Boston, MA,_USA, 5–8 March 2012; pp. 33–40. 58. Tegmark,_M._Life 3.0: Being_Human in the Age of Artificial Intelligence; Knopf: New_York, NY, USA, 2017. 59. Persson,_E. The moral_status_of_extraterrestrial life. Astrobiology 2012,_12, 976–984. [CrossRef] [PubMed] 60. Persson,_E. Interplanetär Etik; Pufendorfinstitutet: Lund, Sweden,_2013. Challenges 2019, 10, 32 9 of_11 61. Allen, C.; Wallach, W._Moral machines: Contradiction in terms_or abdication_of human responsibility. In Robot_Ethics: The Ethical_and Social_Implications of Robotics;_MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2012;_pp. 55–68. 62._Sparrow, R. 19 Can Machines Be_People?_Reflections on the_Turing_Triage_Test. In_Robot Ethics: the_Ethical_and Social_Implications_of Robotics; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA,_USA,_2011; p. 301. 63. Kaplan, F. Who_is afraid of the_humanoid?_Investigating cultural differences in_the acceptance of robots. Int._J. Hum. Robot. 2004, 1, 465–480._[CrossRef] 64._Ambrosius, J.D._Separation of church and space: Religious influences on public support for_U.S. space exploration policy. Space Policy_2015, 32, 17–31. [CrossRef]_65. McAdamis,_E.M._Astrosociology and the_Capacity_of Major_World Religions to Contextualize the Possibility of_Life beyond_Earth. Phys. Procedia 2011, 20, 338–352._[CrossRef