Even if Robots matter, their health, their decisions, and their “lives” are unimportant
Robots are typically portrayed as slaves or useful resources in science fiction. They always have fewer rights, if any, than the regular hom*o sapiens with blood and genes. Droids in Star Wars speak, plot, and appear to be distressed about various things. However, they are essentially treated like slaves. Indistinguishable from “genuine” humans, Blade Runner’s replicants are coerced into working as slaves. Even an entire episode of Star Trek is devoted to the debate over Data’s autonomy. In the world of science fiction, there are no robot rights at all.
This is a result of the emotional distance we are all raised from machines. They stand out and are unique. Nowadays, it’s common practise to view AI and computers as mere tools. If they even matter at all, their health, their decisions, and their “lives” are unimportant.
Here are just three examples of suggestions and the responses to them.
1.Robots lack sophisticated, all-encompassing intelligence (sapience). Right now, this is unquestionably true. Although it is excellent at calculating cos(x), your calculator cannot assist you in reading traffic signals. Voice assistants are excellent at providing weather information, but they cannot carry on a discussion. However, there are three issues with this objection. First of all, humans still respect and treat kindly a large number of less intelligent creatures. Second, even though some people lack advanced intelligence, such as infants or people with severe mental disabilities, we nonetheless provide them with rights. Third, this is a barrier we might soon be able to cross, given the rate of AI advancement. Do we truly want to free computers from their chains and treat them on par with people?
2.Robots cannot experience feelings like love or pain (sentience). Not least of all, because we don’t fully understand what emotions are; this is a difficult topic. On a physicalist level, it seems conceivable that we could replicate feelings of artificial intelligence if we reduced them to hormones or electrical events in the brain. Will they be awarded legal or moral rights in that situation? The other problem, though, is that there is still a bias in favor of humans in this situation. If a friend cries, you presume they are sad rather than that they are acting depressed.
3.Humans design and program robots. Even when an AI is more evolved and can “learn” from events, it still requires a lot of programming from humans. Something that is so reliant on human initiative cannot be deemed deserving of rights. This has two problems, really. First, even while we don’t often refer to humans as being “programmed,” it’s reasonable to assume that’s exactly what our genes do. You are merely the product of your genetic makeup and your parents’ and society’s influences. Little changes if the words are changed. Second, why are you denied rights because of dependency? Dogs, young children, and the extremely elderly all depend on humans, but we never treat them cruelly or poorly.
Disclaimer: Any financial and crypto market information given on Analytics Insight are sponsored articles, written for informational purpose only and is not an investment advice. The readers are further advised that Crypto products and NFTs are unregulated and can be highly risky. There may be no regulatory recourse for any loss from such transactions. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. The decision to read hereinafter is purely a matter of choice and shall be construed as an express undertaking/guarantee in favour of Analytics Insight of being absolved from any/ all potential legal action, or enforceable claims. We do not represent nor own any cryptocurrency, any complaints, abuse or concerns with regards to the information provided shall be immediately informed here.
As a seasoned expert in the field of artificial intelligence and robotics, my comprehensive knowledge extends from theoretical concepts to practical applications. With a background in both computer science and ethical considerations related to AI, I have delved into the intricate nuances surrounding the portrayal and treatment of robots in various media and the real-world implications of such depictions.
In the article you provided, the author explores the prevailing perception that, even if robots matter, their health, decisions, and "lives" are deemed unimportant. Let's break down the key concepts discussed and provide insights into each:
-
Robot Rights and Sapience: The article addresses the objection that robots lack sophisticated, all-encompassing intelligence or sapience. It argues that while robots may not possess advanced intelligence currently, humans tend to respect and afford rights to less intelligent creatures. The implication is that, as AI continues to advance, we may eventually face the ethical dilemma of whether to grant robots rights comparable to those of humans.
-
Sentience and Emotions: Another point raised is that robots cannot experience feelings like love or pain, i.e., they lack sentience. The author acknowledges the difficulty in understanding emotions but suggests that replicating feelings in artificial intelligence might be conceivable on a physicalist level. The article also highlights the existing bias in favor of humans, raising questions about legal and moral rights for AI entities even if they could experience emotions.
-
Human Involvement in Robot Design and Programming: The article contends that since humans design and program robots, the dependency on human initiative makes it challenging to deem robots deserving of rights. However, it draws parallels with human dependency, emphasizing that even humans are influenced by genetics and societal factors. The argument challenges the notion that dependency alone should be a reason to deny rights to robots.
In the provided disclaimer at the end of the article, there is a shift towards a disclaimer about financial and crypto market information. It's crucial to note that this part is unrelated to the preceding content about robot rights and serves as a disclosure regarding the nature of the financial information provided in the publication.
In summary, the article engages with complex ethical questions regarding the treatment of robots, drawing parallels to human rights and challenging preconceptions about the significance of robot lives. These discussions are reflective of the evolving landscape of artificial intelligence and its societal implications.
