Is ownership of advanced androids unethical? [part deux]

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:21 am

What about a robot that thinks and feels like a human?

User avatar
Trevor Bostwick
 
Posts: 3393
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 10:51 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 3:59 am


Except it's more of a machine, it can feel, has emotions, can think independently, can make choices and judgement, is completely aware of it's surroundings and is self-aware. It can understand philosophy, emotions, the way people act, it's not just something that look human and has a voice it is by all means an intelligent being that acts entirely like us.

Your reasoning that because it's different or was born differently it shouldn't be considered human. Our flesh isn't what makes us human, our organs isn't what makes us human but how we act, our personality, our intelligence, all of that is what makes us human.
User avatar
Amelia Pritchard
 
Posts: 3445
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:40 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 9:17 pm

This... And as I said in the other thread. Humans are nothing more than evolutionary programmed biological machines, for the most part, up to and including feelings, it is all the good things at the top of the intelligence scale that makes us more than mere animals/machines.

If we can extend "rights" to people who are basically dumber than snot, to be nice and err on the side of caution morally, certainly we can extend that to human level intelligent machines.

PS: Though I do believe that it will be exceedingly hard, if not impossible, to create an electronic human level intelligence, in eg. skullsize, it might be possible in supercomputer size. For skullsize... I think it is much more likely that we will create artificial biological humans / robots first. Which makes this debate possibly even more important... Ie. manufactured "human" (tanks for those who watched space above and beyond) vs. born humans.

User avatar
Hussnein Amin
 
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:15 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 6:48 am

I've always erred on the side of caution and let Harkness continue his own business. I don't even 'break' him by revealing that he's really an android. He wanted to forget all that, so he gets his right.
User avatar
Elina
 
Posts: 3411
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:09 pm

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 6:43 pm

Allright, here's a question.

Soneone starts adding/replacing parts of their brain and body with robotic parts. Of note, when they replace their brains, they do it bit by bit, only cutting away when parts atrophy due to disuse as the brain more-or-less pushes the duty of thinking onto the prosthetic brain.

Eventually, the person is physically indistinguishable from our hypothetical advanced androids. And, aside from personality changes from age and experience, acts and thinks the same way he did prior to his "roboticization."

Is this person still considered a person, with all the rights that it entails? Or is he now a "thing", with no more rights than a toaster?

If you think he still is a person, why can't advanced androids be considered people?

If you think he's now a thing, at what point of replacement was the line drawn? When his frontal lobe was replaced? Occipital lobe? Hypothalamus? That last group of neurons that can hardly work a mosquito? And, of course, what's so special about that replaced part that it can't be used to grant an android full "personhood" if it was grown in a petri dish?
User avatar
He got the
 
Posts: 3399
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 12:19 pm

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:20 am

Not read everyone posts so if this has been said before sorry,

The problem with androids is that they will not have the base needs that a human will have, with that would come a completely different set of needs. which will affect there thinking on a level. add that with the singularity advent that would come from them being free to do as they please they might end up being the greatest undoing of what is left of humanity. The would be superior to humans in the quickness of thought, reflex, endurance, strength, learning. and senses. they would need to be limitations.

Edition: Also the fact it would take them hours/days to make one android as to humans 9 months for a baby, which would be in now shape to help the human race in any real way bar numbers till its at lest maby the age of 9-10(?) the androids would come of the line fully able.

User avatar
james reed
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 12:18 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:48 am

Not really. An android is just an artificially made human, they are capable of the same thoughts, feelings, beliefs and mental functions a human goes through. they aren't "some machine" just because they don't require food, water or any of that.

Your line of logic is heavily flawed, we shouldn't treat an android as a human because they don't eat and drink? Sorry but that really makes little sense.

Also because they're different from us we shouldn't treat them equally?

So the body builder who is stronger then me isn't suppose to be considered human to me because they're strong?
So the scientist that is more intelligent then me isn't suppose to be considered human to me because they're smarter?
The person with better eyesight, the person with better reflexes, the person who is fastest etc etc shouldn't be equal because they're better then me?

That's not how it works, just because someone is born differently or has different skills doesn't mean they aren't human. Androids have the capacity to be equal to humans in every way and they should be treated with such respect.
User avatar
Alan Cutler
 
Posts: 3163
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2007 9:59 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:42 am

Do not twist what I said to be relevant to mankind as a race, they would not be "Human" they is no way for them to be "Human" they would be "Android" they is no need for them to take are shape, just we we gave them such so they are easy on the eye and make us feel more relaxed around them. they could have ten arms if they wanted, why limit to two? that is human intervention there. every one that comes of the line can be what ever it wants, even upgraded later if need be, humans can not get past a set limit due to biology, with out messing around with are own DNA we are stuck as we are for the most part. (Randomness of genetics aside) Androids would not be as limited as we are, they could live in more areas of the world then we can, they have no need to breath/eat/sleep they would not be botherd by the cold like we would nor heat for that matter.

Based on your own logic Dolphins which are very smart and apes are as well, should we consider them to be human-like as well? we don't they are animals.

User avatar
Patrick Gordon
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 5:38 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 6:34 pm

I'm just surprise no one has said, ‘If they look like a human, talk like a human, think like a human...then for all intents and purposes, they're human.’
User avatar
Krystal Wilson
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:40 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:13 pm

And would you own an android any more than you would own any human follower, that is outside of Clover who you actually bought.

Add game-play imitations, Lydia would not suddely leave you and find she would study magic instead, as it would be annoying.

User avatar
Leah
 
Posts: 3358
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:11 pm

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 5:42 pm


But I'm not twisting your words, what I just said is incredibly valid to your line of logic as it's essentially what you're saying. While Dolphins are smart they don't possess the same mental capacity of humans. Androids are human and using the excuse "But they're different!" doesn't help your case.
User avatar
Alisha Clarke
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 2:53 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:04 pm

What's interesting is that androids are not alive, because they don't meet the requirements for life (can't reproduce, etc.). Still they are conscious, still they deserve the same rights as humans. And that's where the problems begin.

Synths do not age. It's safe to assume that they could theoretically (unless they have Cortana-like built in 'life'span-limitations or something) live forever, given proper maintainment.

Synths are immune to sickness.

Synths theoretically surpass humans at least at some fields of work.

Synths can be programmed.

The differences between humanity and synthkind are immense, the similarities are even greater. However, the differences will inevitably lead to clashes. It's impossible to smoothly integrate another sapient being into civilization when the differences are as glaring.

User avatar
kristy dunn
 
Posts: 3410
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:08 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 9:04 am

To be fair I am getting a off topic. To answer the question I don't think it would be "Unethical". We own Dogs/Cats/Livestock. Androids to me are just thinking machines. like a supercomputer. so to me no,

User avatar
Mrs. Patton
 
Posts: 3418
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 8:00 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 5:17 pm

Yes, thinking machines that can feel, understand emotions, have the same level of thoughts as humans, are capable of a lot of things we are, and without knowing that they are androids could pose as humans 100%

so totally not humans just because they're different.

Also most pet owners don't actually consider their pets as property or something that can be owned, most treat them as family because that's what they are to people.
User avatar
LuBiE LoU
 
Posts: 3391
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 4:43 pm

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 8:31 am

Androids do not have the same metal capacity as a human, they are would be like comparing a drop of water and the sea. they would have intent recall, we dont, they would never forget, they would recognize a persons face fair better then we can. to say we have the same capacity is wrong, they would learn instantly from reading a book, we would need to study proper, if we read a book on some sort of marshal arts we would have to spend years to learn it, they could learn everything just by flicking though it. we would spend years getting the form right, them instant. they computer brain would be better, but it would think logicically, the only thing a human would have is using unconventional thinking to outsmart them in some manner.

But by the law we do own pets, if a dog attacks some one we don't go "oh well, its the dogs fault" the human owner does get fined due to it is its property

User avatar
Cassie Boyle
 
Posts: 3468
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 9:33 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:51 am


wouldnt that ruin the whole point of androids simulating humans tho? if they are like the same as humans and you cant tell the two apart most of the time then they virtually become humans and thus are more like clones as a matter of fact. expect for working on electricity and being composed of mechanics. ...would it be inhuman to enslave clones?
User avatar
IsAiah AkA figgy
 
Posts: 3398
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 7:43 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 1:10 am

There's no such thing.

User avatar
Bee Baby
 
Posts: 3450
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 4:47 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 7:31 pm

Says you. Harkness was pretty human in his motivations to my eyes.

Also, as an aside to the 'THEY'RE BETTER THAN US THEY'LL TAKE OVER!' why? Underlying human need to spread and take over things is our need to procreate. We need resources and space to procreate. An immortal species has no need to procreate. They just need to facilitate their own existence. I imagine conflict/death would seem especially unappealing to them.

User avatar
Strawberry
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 11:08 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 2:57 am

In the real world, no. But we are talking about the fictional Fallout universe, where what is possible is determined by the writers. I will probably treat the androids in the game as if they were sentient and had rights because that's how Harkness was presented in Fallout 3 and how it looks like androids will be presented in Fallout 4. I'm accepting the world as it's presented.

It would be cool, though, if Bethesda pulled a Tenpenny Tower on us. Present the androids and sympathetic and oppressed so the player helps them then they turn around and start slaughtering all the humans ...

User avatar
Thema
 
Posts: 3461
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:36 am

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 8:25 am

Then there's no discussion. Unfortunately, you can't prove your point. Neither can anyone prove the opposite.

It's safe to assume that synths think and feel like humans though. The following points exemplify this:

1. True, self-conscious AI is pre-war technology. To think that an advanced post-war faction (compare to Curling FEV and FEV-serum, the most sophisticated post-war inventions by another tech-heavy faction) couldn't further develop the ZAX prerequisites into a human-sized synthetic brain is delusional.

2. The artificial human is modeled after the born human, so is their brain. Btw, synths are (at least the more recent models) organic.

3. Harkness has motivation. If this is just an illusion, then how's your own ego not either?

4. I am an android. And believe me, I am a person.

User avatar
jason worrell
 
Posts: 3345
Joined: Sat May 19, 2007 12:26 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:09 pm

I think it comes down to what you believe a 'human' is. If you think that a human being is a sum of his/her biological parts that can think and feel, than a machine who is a sum of its mechanical parts who can think and feel is not really any different.

User avatar
zoe
 
Posts: 3298
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 1:09 pm

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 7:45 am


A robot is a machine.
User avatar
Gaelle Courant
 
Posts: 3465
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:06 pm

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 10:51 pm


No its not more than a machine.

It is just an advanced machine.
User avatar
Ebony Lawson
 
Posts: 3504
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 11:00 am

Post » Fri Nov 27, 2015 11:24 pm

Except the Tenpenny Tower situation had red flags all over it that Roy was a psychopath. Having them come out of the blue with "Kill All Humans" would be hamfisted.

:facepalm:

What are we, but molecular machines? How many times must this be trotted out? Why do those against think there's a clear sharp line delineating things?

User avatar
Alycia Leann grace
 
Posts: 3539
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:07 pm

Post » Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:56 am


youre taking the "molecular machines" metaphor way to literal... we are not machines, molecular yes but not literal machines.
User avatar
Phillip Brunyee
 
Posts: 3510
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:43 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Fallout 4