Equal Rights for... Robots

[Pebbles]

gotta love naturalism.

after all when my grandpas had alzheimers(both sides ) they totally forget who they were for the most part.

so therefore those robots have more rights then them.

remember which is more efficient in science? a logical unbaised non tiring machine or you who tires and is biased and that can apply to any field

hmm sound like dune doesnt it?

I know about alzheimer's more than just the science of the matter. My family has a genetic pre-disposition to the development of the disease.

As I'm sure you know it's never as simple as they are then arn't.
-Somtimes the pepole with the condition were themselves completely
-Somtimes she was my nan having a "funny turn" as she put it.
-Other times they were somone else entirely
-And eventually she was nobody at all.

as you know jason... it's not a simple transition they phase between them gradually spending more and more time in each state with moments of lucidity suddenly jerking back to themselves only to fade away again.

Eventually yeah I'd take my experience with what happened to my grandparents and I'd use it to renforce what I said... the last times I saw my nana all she did was poke a wall socket constantly for 30 minutes, not only did she not recognise who I was she didn't even know what a face or a voice was Let alone anything else around her.
She hadn't said a word in months didn't communicate anything at all anymore we wern't notified of any change before she eventually died.

No she wasn't a person. And yes a robot could easily be more of a person than she was, Without the brain to contain or define who she was she was just an empty shell who carried a superfical likeness of my nan.

 

[jasoncran]

the same then can be said with the child that is nothing but of a clump of cells.

the only difference if we put to sleep the elderly like we do with the unborn then people would see that horror that abortion really is.

 

[Mike]

Humans ARE machines The biology that drives us and control us, is materialistic and mechanistic, No supernatural intervention is required to make us work.

What makes us INDIVIDUALS is our minds through the mechanism of our brain. Our processing and self-awareness, Those emotions and the ablitity to relate to one another through those emotions. without that we are just meat.

Again, your comments have lent to the premise of my OP. Atheists/agnostics see nothing of particular value in humanity when compared to any other creature, so if a droid walks, talks & thinks, giving the appearance that they are the same, I can see a very big clash of ideals in society.

I realize this is a farfetched concept by 2011 standards, but who knows in the future? Let me ask you this, Pebbles. Hypothetically, if the technology advances in our lifetimes, and these droids are among us, would you support the same penalty for the "murder" of one of them as you would the murder of a human? I'll have a follow-up question for you once you answer that.

As Jason said, the devaluation of human life has far-reaching implications. That's a very sad result of a person having not accepted God's Revelation.

 

[jasoncran]

heres one. what if the robots have decided since nature made them and not man what then? or if they dont like us and see us as evil

what if they dont want to do our work and so forth. as they feel we are hindrance on them.

 

[Pebbles]

I realize this is a farfetched concept by 2011 standards, but who knows in the future? Let me ask you this, Pebbles. Hypothetically, if the technology advances in our lifetimes, and these droids are among us, would you support the same penalty for the "murder" of one of them as you would the murder of a human? I'll have a follow-up question for you once you answer that.

It would depend... A non-human intelligence might not perceive time or isolation in the same way as human might.

The reasons for punishing a person for commiting a crime are for 2 reasons.
1: To reform the indivduals behaviour.
2: To punish the indivdual for the sake of the victim of the crime.

So you'd have to consider sucessful such measures might be to a robot... for exsample 40 years in prison might be a blink of an eye to an intelligent computer.
Of course you might argue how sucessful we are in that goal but that's the premise.

 

[Pebbles]

As Jason said, the devaluation of human life has far-reaching implications. That's a very sad result of a person having not accepted God's Revelation.

I value persons, for their emotions and insight of their minds.
I don't value human tissue, for the sake of it having human genes.

 

[stovebolts]

I know about alzheimer's more than just the science of the matter. My family has a genetic pre-disposition to the development of the disease.

As I'm sure you know it's never as simple as they are then arn't.
-Somtimes the pepole with the condition were themselves completely
-Somtimes she was my nan having a "funny turn" as she put it.
-Other times they were somone else entirely
-And eventually she was nobody at all.

as you know jason... it's not a simple transition they phase between them gradually spending more and more time in each state with moments of lucidity suddenly jerking back to themselves only to fade away again.

Eventually yeah I'd take my experience with what happened to my grandparents and I'd use it to renforce what I said... the last times I saw my nana all she did was poke a wall socket constantly for 30 minutes, not only did she not recognise who I was she didn't even know what a face or a voice was Let alone anything else around her.
She hadn't said a word in months didn't communicate anything at all anymore we wern't notified of any change before she eventually died.

No she wasn't a person. And yes a robot could easily be more of a person than she was, Without the brain to contain or define who she was she was just an empty shell who carried a superfical likeness of my nan.

Pebbles,

It saddens me deeply that you think so little of our human race and when your own Grandmother cannot give you what you expect from her, you are so readily to dispose of her.
At what point Pebbles does it not have to be about you, and start to become more about her?

My view of Atheists is starting to change because what I'm seeing, is a world view that is selfish and self seeking.

 

[stovebolts]

I value persons, for their emotions and insight of their minds.
I don't value human tissue, for the sake of it having human genes.

And what you're making very clear, is that you base that value on what you in return receive from them.

You're "Nana" still had a mind, or else she would not have been able to talk to wall sockets... And that in itself shows that she had emotion.

But it doesn't fit in your box. She has become a burden to you and you derive no pleasure from her... So you call her worthless and wish to dispose of her.

And you wonder why we accuse Atheists of having no moral compass? To be honest, I am just starting to understand this.

 

[Pebbles]

Pebbles,

It saddens me deeply that you think so little of our human race and when your own Grandmother cannot give you what you expect from her, you are so readily to dispose of her.
At what point Pebbles does it not have to be about you, and start to become more about her?

My view of Atheists is starting to change because what I'm seeing, is a world view that is selfish and self seeking.

Perhaps explaining my position from such a personal viewpoint skewed my message.

You can do MRI and get an Emperical view of it and aquire and observation beyond a personal observation of what is clearly happening.

View attachment 2176

http://www.medicexchange.com/news/2...r-people-at-high-risk-of-alzheimer’s-disease/

On the Left is a healthy brain on the right is a brain from somone suffering severe Alhizhimers brain function is measured by colour Red indicating high levels of brain function. Blue indicating low... The Neurones die and the brain becomes significantly atrophied in Alhizhimers disease. Those areas you can see lit up in the Diseased brain are those spots at the back involved in imaging from the eyes, and perhiperal vision (but not advanced visual processing and face recognition whitch is done towards the front of the brain) And brain stem regions involved in basic Heart lung operation.

 

[Pebbles]

And what you're making very clear, is that you base that value on what you in return receive from them.

You're "Nana" still had a mind, or else she would not have been able to talk to wall sockets... And that in itself shows that she had emotion.

But it doesn't fit in your box. She has become a burden to you and you derive no pleasure from her... So you call her worthless and wish to dispose of her.

And you wonder why we accuse Atheists of having no moral compass? To be honest, I am just starting to understand this.

How dare you... Your just intentionally misconstrueing and overtly misrepresenting what I'm saying to make yourself sound like some rightious holy hero.

firstly she wasn't talking she was poking it like a metronome might move.
Persistent Vegitative State is what it's called.

At least what I value is somthing emperical that can be observed and measured to exsist or not brain function, A mind... your notions of humanity are completely subjective and based on your own feelings.

You wouldn't value a tumor, Dispite it begin human tissue all senses of the word. Yet you'd value somthing because you think it LOOKS like a human. Who's really self centered and selfish here?

It has nothing to do with my external perception of them, a person could suffer from Locked-In syndrome

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locked-in_syndrome
An indivdual fully aware of themselves and with emotions but completely unable to move even blink.

I'd consider them as much a person as you or me and as worthy of respect as anyone.

 

[stovebolts]

How dare you... Your just intentionally misconstrueing and overtly misrepresenting what I'm saying to make yourself sound like some rightious holy hero.

If I have misunderstood you Pebbles, then I am very sorry. I understand what it feels like to be misunderstood and I know what it feels like to have somebody twist my words to fit the others agenda. It's not right, and I don't want you to feel that way because of my lack of understanding.

If you feel I have done this, then please accept my apology.

Help me to understand your view, and I'll go back try to read what you wrote with that perspective.

Jeff

 

[Mike]

It would depend... A non-human intelligence might not perceive time or isolation in the same way as human might.

The reasons for punishing a person for commiting a crime are for 2 reasons.
1: To reform the indivduals behaviour.
2: To punish the indivdual for the sake of the victim of the crime.

So you'd have to consider sucessful such measures might be to a robot... for exsample 40 years in prison might be a blink of an eye to an intelligent computer.
Of course you might argue how sucessful we are in that goal but that's the premise.

You might have misunderstood my question. I didn't ask if the punishment would be the same if both a droid and a human committed murder. I asked if the punishment should be the same, in your opinion, if both of them were murdered.

Thanks!

 

[stovebolts]

How dare you... Your just intentionally misconstrueing and overtly misrepresenting what I'm saying to make yourself sound like some rightious holy hero.

Again, I want to apologize if I came across or you viewed my post in that way. I understand how that must have hurt you, and I'm sorry that I've hurt you. It was not my intent and I did not intentionally misconstrue or overtly misrepresent you.

firstly she wasn't talking she was poking it like a metronome might move.
Persistent Vegitative State is what it's called.

Sorry I got that wrong. But I can see an old lady poking an outlet in my mind, and I wouldn't call it a Persistent Vegitative State. If it were my grandma, I'd say, "That's my grandma" and it hurts to see her so distant. I would value that hurt within me, embrace the hurt and use it to try and make her life just a little bit better where I could.

At least what I value is somthing emperical that can be observed and measured to exsist or not brain function, A mind... your notions of humanity are completely subjective and based on your own feelings.

You started your reply with "How dare you!" That tells me that I've hurt you and it also tells me that the hurt I caused you is driving your reply. Emotion plays a bigger role in how we see the world than most of us admit. While I admit that I buy a coat more for it's functionality, my wife buys a dress because it makes her feel good about herself.

And this brings me to what is empirical and observable. Our observations are limited by or own eyesight. I see things that you don't see and you see things that I don't see. Does that make what we see any less valuable, or does it make one person wrong and the other right?

But to be clear, my view on humanity is that every life holds value. Seen, or unseen.

You wouldn't value a tumor, Dispite it begin human tissue all senses of the word. Yet you'd value somthing because you think it LOOKS like a human. Who's really self centered and selfish here?

Just because somebody's brain functionality isn't up to par doesn't mean they are any less human. I don't value a tumor because a tumor does not totally represent humanity. But more to your point, I believe that a human has a body, a soul and a spirit, and I don't know that I could explain these ideas to you but would if you are willing.

It has nothing to do with my external perception of them, a person could suffer from Locked-In syndrome

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locked-in_syndrome
An indivdual fully aware of themselves and with emotions but completely unable to move even blink.

I'd consider them as much a person as you or me and as worthy of respect as anyone.

I don't like labels because labels put things in boxes... boxes limit potential.

Before we go to far, check this out.

http://www.teamhoyt.com/about/index.html

Rick was born in 1962 to Dick and Judy Hoyt. As a result of oxygen deprivation to Rick's brain at the time of his birth, Rick was diagnosed as a spastic quadriplegic with cerebral palsy. Dick and Judy were advised to institutionalize Rick because there was no chance of him recovering, and little hope for Rick to live a "normal" life.

[video=youtube;iZq_qa19kRc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZq_qa19kRc&feature=related[/video]

 

[Classik]

"Truth does not become more true if the whole world were to accept it; nor does it become less true if the whole world were to reject it." ---

 

[stovebolts]

"Truth does not become more true if the whole world were to accept it; nor does it become less true if the whole world were to reject it." ---

Such an empirical, yet subjective statement! :eeeekkk

 

[stovebolts]

I wanted to really highlight what I said earlier.
************************************

I don't like labels because labels put things in boxes... boxes limit potential.

Before we go to far, check this out.

http://www.teamhoyt.com/about/index.html

Rick was born in 1962 to Dick and Judy Hoyt. As a result of oxygen deprivation to Rick's brain at the time of his birth, Rick was diagnosed as a spastic quadriplegic with cerebral palsy. Dick and Judy were advised to institutionalize Rick because there was no chance of him recovering, and little hope for Rick to live a "normal" life.

You know, if Dick and Judy were to have taken the "Logical" approach, they would have never experienced the emotional rewards that the below video so clearly depicts.

And I have to believe that raising Rick wasn't easy and it had to of taken a tremendous amount of effort and dedication. But what I see through Dick, is a father that loved his son for who is son was and never gave up hope, even though I'm sure he was very good at experiencing disappointment.

[video=youtube;iZq_qa19kRc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZq_qa19kRc&feature=related[/video]

 

[Classik]

Pebbles can boldly say this:
"Truth does not become more true if the whole world were to accept it; nor does it become less true if the whole world were to reject it." ---

And she is right....
Stove can still sing it as a song.


WE ALL ARE RIGHT

 

[stovebolts]

Pebbles can boldly say this:
"Truth does not become more true if the whole world were to accept it; nor does it become less true if the whole world were to reject it." ---

And she is right....
Stove can still sing it as a song.


WE ALL ARE RIGHT

Yet scripture says,

If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.

We either see scripture as truth, or we don't. Regardless, we all have faith, but the question remains to whom or what that faith is placed.

 

[Pard]

Who's really self centered and selfish here?

Still you.

And I find your comment on the mind laughable. You seem to think that it is a notion only us "crazy Christians" have or some such nonsense. Don't kid yourself there dude. The majority of the psychiatric community and neurological community will agree that there is something else there which we often refer to as a "mind". They cannot put their thumb on it and just like much of the scientific field it cannot be proven but it's still there.

And from what I've gathered from reading you posts all over the forum you probably would write off those medical and scientific professionals as a bunch of "quakes" to stick with those "crazy Christians" but that isn't a very smart tactic. Writing off your intellectual opponents isn't a winning strategy.

So maybe you'd like to recant your last post because that is exactly what you did to Stovebolt who made some very valid points. In fact it's funny because directly after saying that he is misconstruing your words you go and reinforce what he supposedly misconstrued.

The way people respond to opposition speaks about who they are and you responded with ad hominum attacks...

Back to point...

Your own life philosophy may see humans as no more or less than an animal and in fact a robot but let me remind you that your philosophy is hardly the accepted. Behaviorist thought has been widely rejected but the philosophic community over the last two hundred years. It was a good thought for the time in which is was conceived but it cannot stand up to modern day discoveries and its attempt to do so have all been pathetic and fallacious.

It boils down to a very simple thing. Robots do not feel anything that isn't pre-programmed. They do not "learn". They are programmed. Even the "learning robots" are not truly learning and if you don't believe me go ask someone in the robotic/programming field (if you like I can point you in the direction of the head of Robotic Engineering at WPI).

I don't pretend to be some professional in the robotics or programming fields because I am not one however all of my friends are either in the robotic business or the killing business (military... it's a joke).

They all would have a good laugh at your transhuminist/futurist attempt to defend the "rights" of a synthetic "life form". The materialist approach is laughable at best. It doesn't answer the obvious question of "if it isn't a consciousness then what is it?".

 

[Sparkey]

Would robots be allowed to join together into communities? Could they incorporate? If so, they'd have more rights than us mere humans. The path is paved already; all that remains is for "them" to place their feet upon it.

Sparrow, I honestly don't understand this. Could you expound upon it?

Thanks!

I can try. If we broaden the topic to include empowerment of non-corporeal entities, that is, giving rights to disembodied entities like corporations and then allow robots or other forms of artificial intelligence to join together they (the artificial intelligences) could form corporations and have rights given to them under articles of incorporation.

Is it too science-fiction to consider robotics and embodied AI forming under existing corporate law to, let's say, patent the intellectual property that comes out of such collaboration? Some research on the topic, "Autonomous Agents" should clarify what I'm trying to address here.