Both designers and users of social robots tend to anthropomorphize robots. Focusing on the question how to conceptualize the relation between robots and humans, this paper first outlines two opposite philosophical views regarding this relation, which are connected to various normative responses to anthropomorphism and anthropomorphization. Then it argues for a third view: navigating between what it calls “naïve instrumentalism” and “uncritical posthumanism”, it develops a hermeneutic, relational, and critical approach. Paradoxically, by unpacking the human dimension of robotics in its use and development, this view enables a critical discussion of anthropomorphizing robots. At the same time, and again somewhat paradoxically, it avoids a naïve instrumentalist position by taking robots’ role as an instrument in a larger con-technology seriously. As such, the third view questions the dualism assumed in the debate. The paper then explores what this means for the field of social robotics and the education of computer scientists and engineers. It proposes a reform based on a relational understanding of the field itself and offers suggestions for the role of users-citizens.

社交机器人的设计者和用户都倾向于将机器人拟人化。着眼于如何概念化机器人与人之间的关系这一问题，本文首先概述了关于这种关系的两种相反的哲学观点，它们与对拟人化和拟人化的各种规范性反应有关。然后，它提出了第三种观点：在所谓的“纯朴的工具主义”和“非批判的后人类主义”之间导航，它发展了一种诠释，关系和批判的方法。矛盾的是，通过解开机器人在使用和开发过程中的人文维度，这种观点使得人们可以对拟人化的机器人进行批判性的讨论。同时，这又有点自相矛盾，它通过认真对待机器人在大型科技领域中的工具角色，避免了幼稚的工具主义者的立场。因此，第三种观点质疑辩论中假定的二元论。然后，本文探讨了这对社交机器人学以及计算机科学家和工程师的教育意味着什么。它基于对领域本身的相关理解提出了一项改革，并为用户公民的角色提供了建议。