Robot Love.

[Wandering]

this is related to the "would you date Commander Data" question... I believe the question of android life, the validity of their behaviour and actions etc, their individuality and all that stuff is all well and truly dealt with in the course of the seven seasons of TNG

There's a difference though: our robot would have been programmed to love US and make US happy first and foremost. Data is supposedly free to choose on his own whom he will love and try to make happy, and how much of his potential and personal life will be devoted to that task.

Having reviewed which, I'd have to say "yes".

Funnily enough, I can't imagine Q giving that answer. Seems like you still have a way to go before you truly live up to your self-professed role model

And by the way: if Data wanted to love me and make me happy, I'd totally take him too

 

[The Ü™]

The last time Data has used his lovemaking functions: 8 years, 7 months, 16 days, 4 minutes, 22 seconds.

 

[substitute]

Grrr I just typed out a response but the stupid mouse on my laptop decided to click in Uber's avatar and take me to his profile before I posted it!!!

I was basically saying that

1. If it suits his purposes, Q is up for anything

2. OK, maybe not Data then since he's got the freewill thing... but what about that metamorph woman?

 

[substitute]

Besides, my experiences have led me to believe that a lot more of what we think is our personality, is actually pure biology, than many would be comfortable with admitting...

We're just programmed too, to an extent... I dunno why someone/something doing simply what they're supposed to do, necessarily invalidates the person or the action. Most of us who own pets are happy with and appreciate the level of 'love' that we get from them, despite it being pure instinct and, largely, self-serving, especially in the case of cats, who are far from loyal or 'monogamous'

 

[heart]

I'd take the robot. It is the closest to a guarantee in complete love one could ever get. With a human, the hearts are sometimes too fragile for a lifetime.

Also, with a robot, I know I could never hurt it. With another human, the risk of that is too great to me.

"A vaincre sans peril, on triomphe sans gloire"

When there is no peril in the fight, there is no glory in the triumph. Same with love.

 

[disregard]

True words, heart.

 

[The Ü™]

When there is no peril in the fight, there is no glory in the triumph. Same with love.

Ted Bundy knew that all too well!

 

[heart]

Ted Bundy knew that all too well!

I was talking about love, not serial killers.

But to take respond to your statement there was no peril for Ted Bundy, he was a coward. He used deception to lure his victims into trusting him. No glory for him either, just shame. He was a weak person who would rather kill and disable that which he desired rather than be human and risk hurt. He sort of wanted a type of robot too, a slave to his will because he didn't have what it took to participate in the normal give and take of relationships.

 

[The Ü™]

Sorry, I couldn't resist playing with your words!

 

[disregard]

Sorry, I couldn't resist playing with your words!

And it was as amusing as it usually is.

 

[The Ü™]

And it was as amusing as it usually is.

So pretty amusing, then?

Anyway now that I think about it, I think a robot lover could actually deter many serial killers, since as of now, there isn't anything ethically wrong with abusing a cyborg.

 

[disregard]

I doubt serial killers would prefer killing a robot to a human. I think the whole point is to put someone else in distress.. to control another human's life and end it with your own hands. Robot's don't have lives. There would be no thrill for that reason.

 

[heart]

I doubt serial killers would prefer killing a robot to a human. I think the whole point is to put someone else in distress.. to control another human's life and end it with your own hands. Robot's don't have lives. There would be no thrill for that reason.

Yes, it would not be the same thrill for them. Serial killers are mad dogs, human flukes that there is no help for.

 

[The Ü™]

The give-and-take in relationships, however, is too much for me to bear. So I think a robot would be a better solution than anything. A highly believable cyborg whose only artificial part is the skeleton is good enough for me. Rather than the time-wasting give-and-take, the robot allows for the kind of take-and-take relationship which is what everyone really wants, if it were possible.

However, when it comes to pets, such as my dog, I will not accept a robot dog no matter how real it looks.

 

[substitute]

Uber you're assuming that serial killers kill purely for the kick of doing something illegal or immoral. The truth is that in most cases, there are dozens of complex psychological processes going on in their screwed up minds that cause them to actually think, most of the time, that what they're doing is right/the only choice. Just thought I'd throw that out there...

 

[disregard]

The give-and-take in relationships, however, is too much for me to bear. So I think a robot would be a better solution than anything. A highly believable cyborg whose only artificial part is the skeleton is good enough for me. Rather than the time-wasting give-and-take, the robot allows for the kind of take-and-take relationship which is what everyone really wants, if it were possible.

However, when it comes to pets, such as my dog, I will not accept a robot dog no matter how real it looks.

Makes sense. You find taking and only taking natural, so you assume everyone else does too.

 

[The Ü™]

Uber you're assuming that serial killers kill purely for the kick of doing something illegal or immoral. The truth is that in most cases, there are dozens of complex psychological processes going on in their screwed up minds that cause them to actually think, most of the time, that what they're doing is right/the only choice. Just thought I'd throw that out there...

No, I'm well aware of the sadistic pleasures they get from hurting others. Though with some, it's the reaction they like getting from their victims. I suppose that a robot with convincing enough programming could simulate the same exact acts of being helpless and dominated, which is what serial killers crave.

 

[substitute]

Uber you're generalizing again. If you can imagine any crime at all, or any act whether criminal or not, there are many reasons, all different, why different people might do them. The reasons you state are some, but there are many others that have nothing to do with sadism or wanting to be evil or cruel. Some are quite simply crazy and truly believe they're doing the right thing. Some spanner has been thrown in the works of their psychological make-up and worldview that causes them to think that what they're doing is GOOD, not just for themselves but for the victim and the world in general.

There was a case of a serial killer I studied once, who was a severe introvert, but yet craved human company. But because of his repellent personality (which itself was due to mental disorders), people would just leave him and not come back. He was so lonely and crazy he'd invite people over to his place and kill them (so they couldn't leave him) and them prop them up on the sofa and just sit and watch TV with them there. It was the only way he felt he could be with other people.

And there was this other case where a guy got his mind so warped by a religious cult that he felt he couldn't bear his kids to grow up and live in a world he believed was so evil and full of pain, so he one by one killed them in the most painless way he could, believing he was saving them from earthly pain and sorrow and sending them to heavenly bliss.

I know of many other cases too, where your reasons don't enter into the killer's motives... many of them, from their own warped POV, are acting with 'good', though severely misguided motives.

 

[The Ü™]

Makes sense. You find taking and only taking natural, so you assume everyone else does too.

Everyone wants life to be perfect. No one likes the risk of rejection in the give-and-take. And I think if given the ethical option of take-and-take, everyone would choose it. I'd say the robot is about as close to this sort of perfection as anyone would be able to get. Who cares about the inner clockwork? No one notices and most likely no one cares about how everything on the inside works. No one even knows if other people have sincere feelings for another -- I sure as hell don't -- so why would a robot be any different in that respect?

 

[substitute]

Uber the fact that you associate 'giving' with 'rejection' I find quite poignant... I don't want to assume but it does remind me of things my daughter says, who also has Asperger's. See, for most people, 'giving' is something that's rewarding because the person you give to is made happy and appreciates you for that. But in the case of my daughter, and the other Asperger's people we've met through her support group, giving is tightly bound up with rejection because their autism prevents them from being able to accurately assess what another person wants, so even with the best and sweetest of motives, their attempts at 'giving' often end up with them being yelled at, judged or hated...

I just wondered if that might have some resonance with you?