First Robot able to Show Emotion & develop bonds (Humans)

by dhw, Thursday, August 12, 2010, 14:59 (5024 days ago) @ xeno6696

I wrote that if a robot could produce all the mental activities of a human, it would in my view prove that there is no such thing as a "soul", the case for which depends on the neurons, synapses etc. being the receivers and not the producers of consciousness.-MATT: I guess I might disagree; to me Phineas Gage pretty much destroyed any hope of a soul in my book.-I think the only disagreement here is that you have already decided there is no such thing as a soul, and I haven't. That doesn't affect the argument that a fully sentient robot would provide proof that the material brain is the producer, not the receiver, of consciousness (and by extension identity), in which case there is no soul.-You have pointed out that Nao is a "one-trick pony". Yes, it has the emotional capacity of a one-year-old. My post was based on the possibility of further developments.-I wrote that a fully sentient robot would not settle the chance v. design debate, since the robots have been designed, but it would mean there was no soul and hence no afterlife, so God would become largely irrelevant. You responded: "No...design advocates would simply take the invention as proof that something as complex as human intelligence could only arise by intervention on behalf of an intelligent entity." That is precisely the point of my saying it would NOT settle the chance v. design debate.-I wrote that robot rights would be inseparable from robot responsibilities, but asked if one could separate the programme from the programmer. You question this, and ask what is the responsibility of a human ... or a dog. Perhaps my argument was not clear. If a sentient robot ran amok and killed a dozen people, presumably it would have the same rights as a human to a fair trial, but to what extent would we blame the robot, and to what extent the person who designed its programme? (In the case of a dog, we would hold the owner responsible.) As I said, the ethical ramifications are vast, and also extend to the sphere of our own responsibility for our actions ... see my parenthesis in yesterday's post on heredity and environment.-This is a complex and exciting subject, and I appreciate your keeping us updated both with the new developments and with your own interpretation of them.