Re: Re(2): TI-H: mind vs. computer
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Re(2): TI-H: mind vs. computer
From: Dan <danti@applecyber.dyndns.com>
>I doubt that. Computers are a tool and they always will be a tool, even if
>we make an R2D2. They wouldn't need anything if they had their own "soul",
>but they would be proud to serve us and communicate with us to what we want
>to know (perhaps telepathically). How do I know that they will serve us?
>Well because we will program it to serve us and LIKE it (I'll bet Bill will
>be the first to buy one!)
A agree its a possability, refrence Asmovs (sp?) robots series. However,
I don't think programming an intellegent and self aware being is an ethical
action. If it were we could 'brainwash' and retrain people to work as
slaves
with no ethical problems. This is similar to giving a synthetic organism
programming that causes it to want to work as a slave.
Few people would argue that we should program people to serve us.
This is in total violation of some of the beliefs America was founded on.
The question of why can be thorny, why do people have the rights that
we do? Simply becase we happen to be the correct species (or,
historicly, have the right skin color, or the right genitalia). A human
whos higher brain functions have been destroyed still has all the
basic human rights, however, reasonably intellegent primates, expressing
their wishes via sign language, have no rights (although they are protected
from bad treatment, thanks to many people who do believe that they
should have rights).
If we were to create beings that have mental abilities similar to
our own, I certainly think that they should have rights similar to
our own, regardless that they are not in our same species group,
nor even a species at all.
I'm sure we would accord intellegent aliens the same rights we
give ourselves, and they probably wouldn't even fall into the
same phylum as ourselves. The decision would be based on
intellegence level, not species.
Have you read 'Brave New World'? It brings up this issue, and makes
a statement about it. Everyone born in this world is designed from
birth to fill a particular role. The lowest class is made stupid and
programmed
to want to do nothing more than run elevators and sweep floors. Because
of their programming, the love doing this, and feel depressed when
they are unable to perform their function.
It would be no different if we were to create sentient beings and then
program them to serve us. You may recognize this as acting as a god.
If you are religious you may not find a problem with the creator demanding
complete devotion from the created, and punishing or destroying those
who disobey. Personally I find this repugnant, I believe that sentient
beings should be free to choose their own actions, as free from
external influences as possable.
Please don't take this as a put-down on whatever religion you may
be, I have absolutly no problems with anyone believing in whatever
they wish, as long as they are happy, and don't attempt to force the
belief on me (rational discussion is fine of course, thats often how
we change our beliefs. However, religion being what it is, it is
often difficult to give reasons why one believes what one does,
much is taken on faith and from personal experiances, which are
very difficult to support. ).
>>When computers are capable of comprehension and emotion, self
>>awareness and true cognition, they will no longer be computers,
>>they will be synthetic organisms, deserving of all the rights
>>and privledges we have.
>>
>
>-Dan
DK
Follow-Ups: