Human Dignity in The Digital Bedroom: Theological Undertone and Philosophical Reflection On Sex Robots and Artificial Companionship

References

[1] Adesina, A., Oladele, D., & Okechukwu, A. (2021). Technology, Culture, and Sexuality in Nigeria: A Critical Analysis. Nigerian Journal of Social Sciences, 19(4), 63-80.

[2] Allied Market Research. (2021). Sex Robots Market by Material Type, Application, and End User: Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2021–2030.

[3] Adebayo, O. (2021). Religious Leaders’ Perspectives on Sex Robots in Nigeria. African Journal of Religious Studies, 13(2), 112-129.

[4] Bostrom, N. (2005). In Defense of Posthuman Dignity. Bioethics, 19(3), 202-214.

[5] Broyde, M. J. (2019). Artificial Intelligence and Jewish Ethics. Jewish Law Annual, 22, 281-302.

[6] Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. (2019). Sexroboter: Ethische und rechtliche Herausforderungen. Bonn: bpb.

[7] Burdett, M. (2015). The Technological Society and the Human Person. Theology, 118(2), 83-90.

[8] Cabinet Office of Japan. (2020). White Paper on an Aging Society: Measures for a Longevity Society. Tokyo: Government of Japan.

[9] China Daily. (2019). Rise of Sex Robots in China: Market and Policy Perspectives. China Daily, 12 September.

[10] Child Rescue Coalition (CRS). (2020). Childlike Sex Robots and the Law in the United States: Policy Recommendations. Boca Raton, FL: CRS.

[11] Coeckelbergh, M. (2020). AI Ethics. MIT Press.

[12] Danaher, J. (2017). Robotic Intimacy: Social and Ethical Implications. In J. Danaher & N. McArthur (Eds.), Robot Sex: Social and Ethical Implications (pp. 3–26). MIT Press.

[13] Deutscher Ethikrat. (2020). Robotik für Menschen: Ethische Herausforderungen. Berlin: Deutscher Ethikrat.

[14] Gunkel, D. J. (2012). The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics. MIT Press.

[15] House of Commons Library. (2019). Sex Robots and the Law: A Review of Evidence. London: UK Parliament.

[16] Hursthouse, R. (1999). On Virtue Ethics. Oxford University Press.

[17] JSAI (Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence). (2019). Ethical Guidelines for Robotics and AI. Tokyo: JSAI.

[18] Kant, I. (1785/1996). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.

[19] Kubo, M. (2021). Robotics and Social Withdrawal in Japan: Ethical Perspectives. Japanese Journal of Bioethics, 10(1), 45-61.

[20] Levy, D., & Powell, A. (2018). Sex Robots: The Impact on Human Relationships. AI & Society, 33(2), 273-279.

[21] Li, X. (2020). Sex Robots, Confucianism, and Moral Controversy in China. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 7(3), 533-552.

[22] McArthur, N., & Twist, M. (2017). The Rise of Sex Robots. BMJ Sex Reprod Health, 43(1), 1-2.

[23] National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA). (2021). National Artificial Intelligence Policy. Abuja: NITDA.

[24] National Library of Nigeria. (2022). Artificial Companionship and Ethics in Nigeria: A Policy Overview. Abuja: National Library of Nigeria.

[25] Netherlands Institute for Social Research (NISR). (2017). The Social Impact of Sex Robots in Dutch Society. The Hague: NISR.

[26] Nussbaum, M. (2001). Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge University Press.

[27] Oluwole, J., & Obayemi, A. (2022). Legal Regulation of Sex Robots in Nigeria: Emerging Challenges. Nigerian Law Review, 28(1), 98-116.

[28] Pontifical Academy for Life. (2022). Artificial Intelligence and Human Dignity: Final Document. Vatican City: Vatican Publishing House.

[29] Richardson, K. (2016). Sex Robot Matters: Slavery, the Prostituted, and the Rights of Machines. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 35(2), 46-53.

[30] Robertson, J. (2018). Robo Sapiens Japanicus: Robots, Gender, Family, and the Japanese Nation. University of California Press.

[31] Sachedina, A. (2009). Islamic Biomedical Ethics: Principles and Application. Oxford University Press.

[32] Sharkey, N., van Wynsberghe, A., Robbins, S., & Hancock, B. (2017). Foundation for Responsible Robotics Consultation Report: Our Sexual Future with Robots. The Hague: FRR.

[33] Turkle, S. (2017). Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other. Basic Books.

[34] UK Parliament. (2018). Science and Technology Committee Inquiry: Robotics and Artificial Intelligence. London: UK Parliament.

[35] Vallor, S. (2016). Technology and the Virtues: A Philosophical Guide to a Future Worth Wanting. Oxford University Press.

[36] Vera-Gray, F. (2021). The Right Amount of Panic: How Women Trade Freedom for Safety. Policy Press.

[37] Waters, B. (2014). From Human to Posthuman: Christian Theology and Technology in a Postmodern World. Ashgate.

@article{1719872,
      author = {Joel Bulus Daniel, Silva Yusuf Musa},
      title = {Human Dignity in The Digital Bedroom: Theological Undertone and Philosophical Reflection On Sex Robots and Artificial Companionship},
      journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
      year = {2026},
      volume = {10},
      number = {1},
      pages = {1829-1840},
      issn = {2456-8880},
      url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1719872.pdf},
      abstract = {The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into intimate spheres, particularly through sex robots and artificial companionship, has generated complex ethical, theological, and philosophical debates concerning human dignity, personhood, and the future of relationships. Recent projections indicate that the global sex robot market may reach $1.2 billion by 2030, reflecting increased societal interest and investment (Allied Market Research, 2021). Empirical data show that over 40% of adults in technologically advanced societies express curiosity or acceptance regarding artificial companionship, signaling evolving attitudes toward intimacy and technology (YouGov, 2023). This article provides a critical interdisciplinary review and normative theoretical analysis, employing theological ethics, philosophy of personhood, and technology ethics as primary frameworks. The analysis examines the implications of sexual technology for the intrinsic worth of persons, the authenticity of relationships, and the moral agency necessary for flourishing communities. Drawing on Christian, Jewish, and Islamic theological traditions, as well as Kantian, virtue-ethical, and posthumanist philosophical perspectives, the article situates contemporary technological trends within broader ethical discourses. Methodologically, this research integrates comparative case analysis, critical literature review, and normative theoretical critique, combining empirical data, cross-cultural case studies, and conceptual argumentation to assess unresolved tensions such as commodification, alienation, and regulatory lag. The article concludes with actionable recommendations for policymakers, faith leaders, and technologists, seeking to bridge the gap between rapid technological innovation and enduring questions of human dignity, embodiment, and authentic connection in the digital age.},
      keywords = {Sex Robots, Artificial Companionship, Human Dignity, Theological Ethics, Philosophy of Religion.},
      month = {July},
      doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I1-1719872}
  }