To Anthropomorphize or Not to Anthropomorphize? Finding the Balance between the Machine and the Human in the Legal Regulation and Beyond

Abstract

With the advancement of Large Language Models (LLMs) and machine perception, social robots operating within the public and private spheres are becoming increasingly lifelike, demonstrating a growing capacity to augment or replace human activity in specific contexts. These sophisticated systems, equipped with affective computing (emotion recognition) and advanced linguistic proficiencies, are already deployed across diverse scenarios, with their prevalence and functional variety expected to expand significantly over the coming decade. In some areas the objective of robotic intervention often extends beyond physical assistance, and frequently aims to substitute high-level cognitive, intellectual, or emotional human functions. This trajectory necessitates a high degree of anthropomorphism. In this study, we define this beneficial, efficiency-enhancing, yet dignity-respecting approach as “positive anthropomorphism”. In contrast, current scholarly literature frequently associates anthropomorphism with negative connotations. Within the fields of Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), HRI ethics, and regulatory discourse, the prevailing consensus maintains that “deception”, whereby a robot misleads a user regarding its capabilities or its ontological status as a machine, must be avoided. This stance is reflected in extant legal frameworks. Beyond transparency and anti-deception mandates, current data protection regulations also act as barriers to the implementation of positive anthropomorphism. This paper - based on the analysis of the relevant literature -argues that since the partial authorization of positive anthropomorphism is inevitable in the medium term, a more flexible and balanced approach is required in both social acceptance and legal regulation. Consequently, we propose a complex, phased system for the development and introduction of social robots to shift societal attitudes, alongside a gradual restructuring and partial dismantling of certain legal constraints. Our analysis and recommendations are based on the European context, both in terms of cultural and ethical prerequisites, and legal regulation. It also eschew radical shifts in favor of a process of continuous, proportional balancing.