Haha sorry I am writing with my phone.

But yeah... I know it was me giving you my point of view in this matter. Even though that is what science is trying to achieve. Programing programs inside features to create a base programmed reaction, it is all based on pre programmed codes.

Look guys in the end in the Fallout world as is we have humans that are used for slavery, and artificial intelligence existed before the nuclear exchange, so much so that on of the explanations for the war was that two intelligent super computers launched the nukes because they were bored.

Death to the machines.

Also quit using Star Trek as a viewpoint, the whole show looked at the world with rose coloured glasses.

If they can convince me that they're self-conscious entities driven by their own motivations and goals, then I'll treat them as such. Meaning no to slavery and yes to treating them as an equal with rights and laws/rules they need to follow.

I'd keep a close eye on them, as they'd be alien in their way of thinking and behaving. but that seems common sense to me. Trust needs to be earned.

You'd have to ask our creator (providing we have one). Even then, I'd say it depends on whether or not they have the means to correct our malfunctions. If they don't, then I'd say we're working just fine.

It's a machine. They are just made to look human which makes it easier to form an emotional attachment similar to other humans. People form emotional attachments to cars. That doesn't make it wrong to own them.

A human has a soul.

A machine, no matter how advanced does not. So owning a car that thinks its human is not unethical. Nor a computer or whatever.

Now someone like Vader is human so that would be very evil.

Can you quantify soul? Prove that it exists in any way, shape or form? If you can can you explain why it's existence gives those who possess it a different value than those who don't?

Well what makes us human? The ability to feel emotions? Our sentience, our soul? A concience?

If there is a Artificial Lifeform of whatever kind (andriod, robot, cyborg, anykind) that encompases everything we see as prove of humanity, if it has a concience and sentience, if it has hopes and dreams, if it has emotions, then i would treat it as having equil laws and rights as anny human. But as said by Blinzler, i would keep an eye on them, as despite what they can do, or feel, they are not in the end human, they are alien to me.

Well one, they are organic lifeforms. Not machines.

And two... I'm actually not sure.

Digging the copypasta.

Human souls are nothing but a belief. It has never been proven either way.

Once again, if a machine achieves sentience, and self awareness, how does it matter how it was created?

How do you define life?

And what's with the Vader reference? I'm not sure what you are trying to prove here... That it would be OK to enslave him because he acted like a dike?

....No it's a robot not alive it's inorganic

I addressed that in the first part of the sentence you quoted, "We grant right to animals..." I own a dog in real life. I provide her with food, water, shelter, medical treatment, and lots of attention. In exchange she provides companionship and protection (she is a German Shepard), neither of which she is paid for. Sounds like slavery as she is not provided a monetary benefit. I would have no issue treating a synthetic "human" the same way. If my dog were to be gravely ill, or my synthetic malfunctioning, I would have no qualms about ending its life. It would sadden me, and it would be a last recourse, but I would do it just the same. If it were a human in that condition, I would allow the human to determine its own future.

I am not getting the premise behind the 'their origin/setup is not like ours therefore = lesser.' The reason we exist as we do (if you're not a creationist) is a complete accident. We had no influence over it. If it turned out we were biological constructs would that lessen our capacity for thinking/feeling/being? Would it lessen our humanness? How are we better for being a happy accident than they who were made with intent? It seems like a really bizarre metric to base worth of off. Neither of us chose how we exist but now that we do we... well do yah know? Does it really matter how we are when we fundamentally are?

Why would I be considered a hypocrite? True, androids are essentially indistinguishable from humans, yet at the end of the day... they're not humans. They're man-made robots. I can be against human slavery and be all for android slavery. Androids weren't born to a mother and father due to natural procreation, they were made in a lab by scientists using technology, their body parts consist of a metal structure deep within - they're robots.

I too could say you're a hypocrite if you support the use of Misty Gusty robots to serve humans but are all against the same thing for androids.

I would treat an android the exact same as a human, no more, no less... but people SHOULD be free to use them how they want simply because they are ROBOTS. They're not humans.

Not really, he said of the same cognitive power as humans, i.e. sentient.

I postulate a more rational definition of a soul:

To me, the mind is thinking, reason, logic. The seat of rational thought.

To me, the soul is feeling, platitudes, sentiment. The seat of emotion.

When someone just parrots whatever they're told to say, you think of them as "mindless".

Sterilized corporate environments, stepford smilers, and all that stuff are thought of as "soulless".

A3-21 was pretty damn incensed (an emotion) about being treated as a thing (a logical conclusion) in that recording. And so was every other synthman he chased down before realizing he was just a thing to his masters. He had emotion. He had a soul. He had rational thought, a mind. He's a full person as far as I'm concerned. I doubt that when they designed the brain system for these androids that they intended their creations to reach these conclusions, but they did anyway.

The problem I have is that I cannot discern the difference between creation with organic chemicals and creation with mundane ones.

Scientists could create "life" from either. Are genetically modified viruses given a higher status based on their biological nature? I doubt many people would.

If you create something that is truly sentient, with a personality derived of its own accord, and the ability to create it's own goals and work towards them adapting to its environment then as far as I'm concerned, it's alive, regardless of what it's made from. A lab grown human slave would be considered an abomination by most people's logic, so why should a lab grown metal one with exactly the same capability for mental processing be considered any different?

Another problem I have is that being born of genetic matter has historically never proven to be a good or bad thing overall. There are good people and bad people. The world would be a better place if many people hadn't been born. Put an android in one of their places that actually does some good and I see it as a win/win.

Just out of curiosity would you also not object to the enslavement of: clones and people carried to term in artificial wombs?

I am not so sure about clones. I'd need some time to consider both sides of it before making a decision. This is an interesting question you've asked me sir! One that I cannot answer right off the bat.

How about you?

That's pretty much what I think when I think about what it means to have a soul too.

Mkay.

EDIT:

I'd object, in both cases. Like I've said to me it doesn't matter how you came to be it depends on what you are. Assuming clones and artificial womb people were completely functionally human in every regard I don't even really understand how I could not object.

Well, depends on their treatment. It depends if they become self aware.

Its amazing, we are debating about something that doesn't exist, but we talk about it as if this were real life politics.

This is why I love video games.

If they have human level intelligence and selfawareness, yes they should have equal rights to humans and slavery is just plain wrong.

Humans are no more than biological machines anyway. We are as much a thing/object and "created" as a toaster/ipad/cow/cockroach is, that is, if we remove those distinguishing highlevel functions (I regard emotions as an extension of instincts and thus basic evolutionary programming).

In general I wouldn't trust my neighbours/random strangers to handle cars, guns, money or an easybake oven... If they get rights... Surely we can give it to intelligent machines and err on the side of moral caution.

EDIT: Cough up proof of the souls existence and objectively measure what it is... Otherwise.. I don't belive "you" ... have one either.

PS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjuQRCG_sUw

Robotsarntpeople/thread:)

"Robotsarentpeople"peopleforceafalsedichotomyandbinarydeterminantonthedilemmaandthinktheyreinherentlyright/thread

stillnotpeople/thread <3