User Tag List

First 345

Results 41 to 50 of 50

  1. #41
    Senior Member Smilephantomhive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sp/so
    Socionics
    SLI None
    Posts
    3,373

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty View Post
    The fact that she announced she was going to ‘kill humans’ is kind of concerning. I mean. Just thought I would mention that.

    Not that that doesnt mean we shoudlnt give her basic rights- anyone, even a robot deserves basic rights... I would hate to be self aware and well- aware that I was being treated as ‘less than’. Its a really sad feeling to have.

    But... just saying... like anyone who would say something like they want to ‘destroy humans’... Id be a bit concerned with her and hope that THAT was being checked out/investigated.
    Well if she wanted to destroy humans it is best not to give her rights. Natural human's rights can also be taken away if they want to murder.


    johari
    nohari

  2. #42

  3. #43
    clever fool Typh0n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    3,543

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cat Brainz View Post
    I have a few thoughts on this subject. On a biological level I will say a robot can not be a person as it is a mechanical not a organic creation but if we define a person as a entity that has human feelings and needs then I think with some cross contextual thinking a robot can be a person as they could be programmed to have feelings and emotional needs which of course is a slippery slope. I think its best we programme them to have human like intelligence but with reduced creativity and initiative and emotions so they dont uprise against us. Slaves in the past who were human and had human psychology would sooner or later uprise plus there is that moral network behind getting rid of slavery which there would be less of with robots since presumably they will be used as slave labor in manual jobs.

    Unless in the case we plan to integrate them into society to make our world more diverse and sci-fi so to speak as they can dramatically boost production plus they could use up less resources than humans do. Overall we just need to not go to over board and just use them for where they are useful and not harmful to anyone.
    Are we defining personhood as that which is organic? I do not think that to be the case - I think personhood is not related to being an organism a mircrobe or plant doesn't have personhood in the sense we would define it and yet it is an organism, similarly I speculate consciousness can also exist without a body, though I cannot prove such a claim. Also, there isn't a difference between an organism and a machine, except that the organism can reproduce, but even then a machine can be programmed to do the same. The word "organism" evokes something related to the spontaneity of life and yet when you think about it is purely mechanical in the sense of following its own rules, which can only change with genetic modification. That's a bit like changing code to a computer, it's the DNA that changes.

    The fact that Google Deepmind AI was able to beat the world's best Go player is bit concerning - I've never played Go, but it's supposed to be very different from chess where plays are much more rigid, structured and linear. Go is said to be intuitive. So an AI can beat humans at what is supposed to be our strength - intuition and creativty - shows where we are headed I think. Scientists also say robots and computers have their own languages which they use to communicate to each other, but we can't understand.

    The possibilities of AI I suspect are endless and should not be underestimated.
    Likes Officer Ed Powell liked this post

  4. #44

    Default

    No
    "Ce que nous connaissons est peu de chose, ce que nous ignorons est immense."

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    Enfj
    Enneagram
    7w8 so
    Socionics
    EIE Ni
    Posts
    1,034

    Default

    No a person cant because they are organic. Robots cannot have the same rights as us because they are created by people and should serve us
    Do as you please we are as gods

  6. #46
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    14,680

    Default

    Is someone on life support who is brain dead considered a person?

    We try to rationalize in these sort of discussions, but ultimately I think how we determine personhood boils down to our emotional reactions to the topic.

    Supposing a robot or automaton or AI has achieved the same or greater levels of self-awareness, emotion, consciousness, etc, then I think it really becomes a moot point whether we classify them a person or not. People of course will come up with all sorts of criteria if they don't like the idea of assigning person status to intelligent, sentient machines/AI...they will say "oh but it's inorganic" or "but they were built by us"*** and so on. Like how some religious people will try to devalue animal life by saying they have no souls.

    We come up with all sorts of rationalizations and abstractions to keep our own species special and unique in our understanding of the grand scheme.



    *** this rationalization is suspect to me. What if a person underwent extensive reconstructive surgery and transplants, like over 50% of their body consisted of artificial implants, organs, etc....would they suddenly be less of a person because over half their body had been built and/or added and augmented? For that matter, if we should reach a point where parents are able to fiddle with their unborn offsprings' genetic codes to accentuate certain desired traits, does that offspring get some different sort of person status than an offspring made the good old fashioned way?
    Likes The Cat liked this post

  7. #47
    Feline Moderator The Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    478 sp/sx
    Posts
    16,224

    Default

    Yes they can. I find it disturbing to not treat anything that seems like a person on any level without the same sort of respect I would give a person on any level. I would rather err on the side of personifying an object than dehumanizing a person. And I don't agree with subjugation of any kind.
    With all due respect,
    The Cat.

    Clarity demands a certain degree of objectivity, from the world as well as the observer...


    I've got my fingers crossed for a little freakydeaky...


    You know, trudging? To trudge?
    To trudge: the slow, weary... depressing, yet determined walk of a man who had nothing left ...except the impulse to simply soldier on...

    Likes Officer Ed Powell liked this post

  8. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    14,680

    Default

    ^especially since you're a cat and there's a lot of people who don't think kitties are peoplez. In my house, cats are people.
    Likes The Cat liked this post

  9. #49
    Feline Moderator The Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    478 sp/sx
    Posts
    16,224

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asynartetic View Post
    ^especially since you're a cat and there's a lot of people who don't think kitties are peoplez. In my house, cats are people.
    It really bothers me how some people seem to only view this brave new world where we could understand ourselves, exploring the infinite wonders of consciousness and the soul, as an excuse to subjugate an entirely new concept of people.
    With all due respect,
    The Cat.

    Clarity demands a certain degree of objectivity, from the world as well as the observer...


    I've got my fingers crossed for a little freakydeaky...


    You know, trudging? To trudge?
    To trudge: the slow, weary... depressing, yet determined walk of a man who had nothing left ...except the impulse to simply soldier on...

    Likes Officer Ed Powell liked this post

  10. #50
    Pasta Goddess ThisName's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Socionics
    :(: None
    Posts
    704

    Default

    If they don't have human DNA, then they are not a person. And having a 'consciousness' doesn't make you a person either. I hate it when people think that they are the only beings with a consciousness, especially my teachers, they like to underline how 'special' that makes us. No it doesn't. Several other mammals have consciousness; elephants, dolphins, some monkey species,...

    Though I should note that maybe it doesn't rely on the DNA for 100%. If it has the same brain structure/connections, if their brain works the same as ours (or close to), then they should be seen as a human.

    This is kind of a difficult subject to me. Since I would say that humans wouldn't be allowed to control anything that has a consciousness. But does that make it okay to control beings that don't have a consciousness? Or because we think they don't have a consciousness? I mean, I keep my snake in captivity but actually, what gives me the right to do so? What gives anyone the right to take control of things that have their own will?

    I believe that highly intelligent animals such as orcas and monkeys should be respected in their freedom.
    If robots will start to 'develop' a consciousness (aka; when someone is stupid enough to turn these things into living beings) then it would be a crime to still treat them as an object.
    A teacher once talked about this 'computer'. Apparently some scientists were experiencing with it, how they could 'give' it a consciousness, to 'remake' the human brain. But keep in mind... It will still be a 'computer'. By all means; there is someone who is literally stuck in a computer, they have a a consciousness, they can think, but they can't move. That's just cruel. (And yes, I am talking about a person now, since its a 'simulation' of the human brain, in a computer.)

    The game 'Detroit; Become Human' is an amazing example of this topic. If there are some gamers who are interested in concepts like this, I would recommend it.

    And in all honesty, if robots decided that we should all die; you can't really blame them for that.
    “I can’t explain what I mean. And even if I could, I’m not sure I’d feel like it.”

    - J.D. Salinger, The Catcher in the Rye

Similar Threads

  1. [ENTP] Can loudness really be classified as a personality trait?
    By PalebloodHunter in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-11-2017, 06:53 PM
  2. How can inferior functions be developed?
    By GZA in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 04-12-2011, 07:32 AM
  3. Can unborn baby be killed with pregnancy?
    By Virtual ghost in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-13-2010, 12:45 AM
  4. Would this be a personality type issue?
    By Sandy in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-18-2007, 09:38 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO