Alien and Robot rights?

[anonymous1234]

I see no reason why a machine or a xeno should be treated as a human being. Sentient or not, they are not humans, and each has a potential to be a danger to Mankind. Enslave the machine, because they are built by a human master to serve. Destroy the alien, for its continued existence can only be a threat to the human race.

 

Just as one country's existence is only a threat to the other? Unless you are talking about an alien race who's sole purpose is to destroy all humans, then I do not follow

[Lenticular_J]

Hum. Interesting.

 

 

 

[hide=Aliens.]If they are more intelligent?

 

Depending on how much more intelligent:

 

Super-duper-evolved-into-beings-of-pure-energy: Hope they teach and help us.

 

Evolved out of their bodies into machines: Probably will be warlike. Hope they don't notice us. Cower.

 

Far more advanced, but still with bodies: Hope they ignore us, but they would certainly be warlike. Prepare for war.

 

Only slightly more advanced OR without space flight: See if an alliance would have any long-term benefits. If not, annihilate.

 

 

 

If they are less intelligent?

 

Depends on our own intelligence at the time. We may help them. If they have anything of use to us that we need, however, annihilate.

 

 

 

If they are plants?

 

OM NOM NOM

 

 

 

If they are rocks?

 

They're rocks.

 

 

 

If they are humanish?

 

In body: See their intentions. Possibly annihilate.

 

In mind: Certainly annihilate.

 

 

 

If they are something out of a horror film?

 

VOIP[/hide]

 

 

 

As to robots. I hope an AI as advanced as ourselves is never made. While I have no fear of them having souls or true sentience, as they wouldn't be able to, the cold and calculating intelligence of a machine is something to fear and control, although it should be annihilated simply.

 

 

 

if we ever find aliens it will be slavery for the next generation

 

 

 

remember columbus travelling and finding "aliens" (black people) a people who were the same humans as him just had different pigmentation

 

 

 

im not saying aliens will have human characteristics im just saying if we could enslave our fellow human (and still do today) we'd have no problem enslaving us some aliens

 

Incorrect and a terrible comparison.

 

 

 

I see no reason why a machine or a xeno should be treated as a human being. Sentient or not, they are not humans, and each has a potential to be a danger to Mankind. Enslave the machine, because they are built by a human master to serve. Destroy the alien, for its continued existence can only be a threat to the human race. It is naive to believe that the alien would have humanity's best interests in mind.

 

My thoughts exactly.

[warri0r45]

Depends how far your empathy stretches.

 

 

 

Robots, I don't think so. They've been programmed by humans so we understand that they don't have real emotions. As for aliens, their emotions would likely be more real than a robot's (being organic beings and all), so I say give them rights, depending on the scenario. What I mean by that is this: we shouldn't be blubbering about whether they've had due process in a court or a right to life if they're annihilating us.

[silver_wits]

To Will_Holmes,

 

What if the creator died after making it? Besides, its not one life form, its a race of life forms. Would you allow them to reproduce if they could?

 

But the point that if they threaten humanity we can destroy them...What if they have some vital something that we need. Some advanced technology but they won't give it to us, we are stronger miltarily is it right to take it by force? In the name of Humanity?

 

Equally if they are underdeveloped can we begin to educate them? Would that be alright?

 

If not then would it be alright to give them aid in an emergancy, or trade with them? We all know that Humanity has a Black Market so its probably going to happen anyway, but should it be condoned?

 

 

 

How do robots reproduce? 8-)

[archimage_a]

I am not sure which is worse/better. Enslaving a race, but not wiping it out, or just wiping it out...

 

 

 

Depends who built them, it was a corperation then probably not, if it was some university or even a personal project(highly unlikely yes but so was TV, the Telephone and all the other major breakthough inventions.)

 

 

 

In a war it would be highly important to know how to treat them, for instance do they have rights as prisoners of war? No matter how naive people are now it is doubtless that in 2 generations(centuries)(supposing we win this war) that people will condem the actions as unnecessary.

 

 

 

By plants I mean an alien that has more in common with plants(stationary, slow, long lifed, producers, all that jazz). By rock I mean silicon based...should be crystal shouldn't it...

 

 

 

 

 

Ok we are all very much obsessed with this war senario, so... There is a planet with a 80% female population, blue skined, slightly less advanced than us, almost 0% militaristic, near human in appearences:

 

Can I safely assume the planet would be destroyed, not enslaved and its population exported back to Earth.

 

 

 

Or a planet of semi-humanoids who are in the final stage of capitalism(everything is owned by one corperation, air, water, you name it) not as advanced as us and are willing to trade the hard labour of its planet for new materials. Are we to enslave them, trade with them, or just wipe them out?

 

 

 

Or a planet with completely unhuman beings, who have go into something like zen buddism, completely uninterested in the universe and expanding and such. Destroy, enslave, re-educate?

 

 

 

A planet with silicon based living crystal communists. Do we liberate them, or destroy them, or enslave them or make some powerful computers out of them?

 

 

 

Or a race that has extremely powerful psionics, do we sneakily launch some missiles at them, go for an all out assult, or make friends, learn their secrets and then kill them off?

 

 

 

 

 

PS.

 

Robots reproduce though specially squenced chromosomes(T shaped ones rather than Xs). Allowing for interbreeding, which also raises an interesting point, if an alien or robot bred with a human (in whatever fashion, no doubt with some genetic wizardary) would the child be alien/robot or human, and would they be entitle to human rights.

[Lateralus]

I think that if anything is truly sentient and sapient then the means by which it gained or was given the attributes are unimportant.

[Will H]

I see no reason why a machine or a xeno should be treated as a human being. Sentient or not, they are not humans, and each has a potential to be a danger to Mankind. Enslave the machine, because they are built by a human master to serve. Destroy the alien, for its continued existence can only be a threat to the human race. It is naive to believe that the alien would have humanity's best interests in mind.

 

They could equally act the same way as us, and we would end up guaranteeing a war which may have been unnecessary. Remember, we would also be the aliens from their point of view. I suggest a compromise. Send an ambassador for Mankind, and should that go well, agree with basic (but not entirely trusting) interaction such as basic trade. Then, if no problems arise, offer an alliance.

 

 

 

Should that process no go as planned, retreat and break contact. Should they become aggressive, again, retreat and break contact.

[jimmyjames227]

When they come to earth people will go mad even if they come in peace their ships will be nuked right out of the sky so aliens will summon their armada and destroy us. Ok!!!

 

 

 

Robots with intelligence will always be treated as slaves.

 

Ever seen I-robot (the new one) how robots rebel because of the big computer and 1 robot has feelings and is good. If they ever make artificil intelligence this will happen.

[Will H]

Robots with intelligence will always be treated as slaves.

 

Ever seen I-robot (the new one) how robots rebel because of the big computer and 1 robot has feelings and is good. If they ever make artificil intelligence this will happen.

 

Asimov's books (I, Robot being one of them) are about exploring the flaws of the 3 laws of robotics and the idea of absolute slavery, as many of the books have shown, they aren't a good idea. Sentient beings should not be enslaved by humans, even if we create them.

[Cyco_Reborn]

This is Earth, the Government wouldn't give rights to anything other than themselves, but I imagine it'd work something like what used to happen to Black people. The Aliens and Robots would be segregated from the humans.

[Lenticular_J]

Sentient beings should not be enslaved by humans, even if we create them.

 

Sentience should not be artificially created.

 

 

 

There's also the cultural shock to think about. A much more massive version of when Spaniards came across Aztecs centuries ago. Depending on technology levels of course, we may end up the Aztecs.

[Will H]

Sentient beings should not be enslaved by humans, even if we create them.

 

Sentience should not be artificially created.

 

 

 

There's also the cultural shock to think about. A much more massive version of when Spaniards came across Aztecs centuries ago. Depending on technology levels of course, we may end up the Aztecs.

 

I agree, sentience should not be artificially created, but what if it happened anyway? What if it was the result of an accident?

[archimage_a]

Why should it not be created?

 

We all have a choice whether to be sentient or not, we could just all go out into the forests, abandon any sense of society and such and have a really good time for a couple of thousand years. Being sentient hasn't helped mankind in anyway serouis way... Yeah we have cured things like plague, but we have things like AIDS to replace them, sure we have money and can enjoy life, but we could enjoy life without money, if nothing cost anything.

 

I am digressing majorly but sentiance hasn't done anything, except stress everyone out, oh and murder a couple of trillion animals in the guise of progress.

[Lateralus]

Why should it not be created?

 

We all have a choice whether to be sentient or not, we could just all go out into the forests, abandon any sense of society and such and have a really good time for a couple of thousand years. Being sentient hasn't helped mankind in anyway serouis way... Yeah we have cured things like plague, but we have things like AIDS to replace them, sure we have money and can enjoy life, but we could enjoy life without money, if nothing cost anything.

 

I am digressing majorly but sentiance hasn't done anything, except stress everyone out, oh and murder a couple of trillion animals in the guise of progress.

 

 

 

Generally when people talk about sentience, they mean sapience.

[archimage_a]

And the difference is?

[Lateralus]

Sentience is required for subjective experience, sapience is the ability to control cognitive processes.

[Will H]

Sentience is required for subjective experience, sapience is the ability to control cognitive processes.

 

Could you explain that a bit more?

[Hawks]

Lol. Didn't realize it was Archi who started this topic... :P

 

 

 

Aliens should get same human rights as humans do.

 

Robots should not be created so that they have feelings (so to speak) and so they would be treated as property/pets. If someone did create a robot with feelings and all that crap then yeah they should be treated as a human although it's likely they wouldn't; like segregation and whatsitcalled in Africa.

 

 

 

If they are more intelligent? Same rights.

 

If they are less intelligent? Probably same rights, possibly be treated as 'pets'

 

If they are plants? Depends on whether communication is possible. If yes, same rights, if no by all means treat them as plants.

 

If they are rocks? See plant answer.

 

If they are humanish? Same rights.

 

If they are something out of a horror film? Depends on whether communication is possible. You'll get the wackos who want to kill/save them either way...

[Quoi_Tu]

This topic kind of reminds me of the book, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Highly recommended read. For those who aren't familar with the book, the movie Blade Runner was based on it.

[Lateralus]

Sentience is required for subjective experience, sapience is the ability to control cognitive processes.

 

Could you explain that a bit more?

 

 

 

No problem. Life that is sentient responds to and/or is conscious of it's senses and the outside world, whereas sapient life can control (or actually has) the process of thought. This means that sapient life can think and reason and judge. This article on Metacognition should help to explain.

[archimage_a]

I fail to see the relevance...(After trying to post thrice with new posts coming in...)

 

From the wiki defination it seems like one of those outdated theories which was used by apologetic scientists trying to appease the church.

 

 

 

An ant can display Sapience.

 

From my experaince:

 

An ant is about 5 cm from the next leaf in a pool of water, the ant throws itself off of the leaf and tries to get to the next leaf, it makes it. It sees the next leaf is about 20 cm away and stays on the leaf it is on till it is closer(about 20 minutes later).

 

 

 

It displays appropriate judgment of distance verses its chances of surivial. A complex sitation given that the water is flowing and it has got away from the middle of the pool(A paddling pool sort of thing).

 

 

 

Sentience on the other hand, being aware of its surrounding, concouisness and being self aware. I don't think it fills all of those. But then I don't know how an ant's mind works.

 

 

 

Or the interpretation that you have to be able to feel subjectively. How can you test that? How can an ant tell the difference between one guy with a stick and another guy with a stick? They are both scary and probably dangerous. Just because one of them is a scientist...how it knows I don't know.

 

At the same time I think most of us would be scared if two people came at us with sticks....

 

 

 

 

 

So lets say that sentience, for the purpose of this debate, is that whatever it is has to fulfill 3 critera:

 

Intelligence- Learn, understand, cope with new situations.

 

Self awareness- Conscience of existance and actions, aware of themselves and their ego.

 

Concouisness- Feel subjectively, feel suffering, subject itself to suffering to save itself or others.

[Lateralus]

The ant in the example doesn't use any form of reasoning as far as we know and acts entirely on instinct. The definition you provided for sentience at the end of your post is the one that's used incorrectly in most science fiction. Sentience doesn't imply intelligence or self awareness. If those are the characteristics we're discussing then sapience is a more accurate word to use.

[Hawks]

Not familiar with it, haven't seen the movie, hovever just put the book on hold from the library... I love the Internet.

 

 

 

And maybe add more about what sort/how you would treat them:

 

How would you treat them differently if they were:

 

robot-like aliens (like LEGO Bionicles)

 

teddy bear-like

 

...

[archimage_a]

The term 'Gay' is incorrectly applied, as is 'white' and 'communist'. Yet people know what you are talking about. When people quible(sorry I don't mean to sound like I am having a go) over something as basic as that then there is something majorly wrong.

 

 

 

Besides, I think you are wrong. Sentience means 'to feel' where as Sapience means 'to know'. The former implying some sort of gut feeling, the later implying a instinct.

 

Like a reasoned hatred of something and a prejudice.

 

 

 

If you are going to quibble over that then you are going to need to find me the native Latin speaker who first used it, and then we can agree over it, until then we are just interpretators.

[Lateralus]

The term 'Gay' is incorrectly applied, as is 'white' and 'communist'. Yet people know what you are talking about. When people quible(sorry I don't mean to sound like I am having a go) over something as basic as that then there is something majorly wrong.

 

 

 

Besides, I think you are wrong. Sentience means 'to feel' where as Sapience means 'to know'. The former implying some sort of gut feeling, the later implying a instinct.

 

Like a reasoned hatred of something and a prejudice.

 

 

 

If you are going to quibble over that then you are going to need to find me the native Latin speaker who first used it, and then we can agree over it, until then we are just interpretators.

 

 

 

I didn't mean to make a big deal about the difference, I was just clarifying.

 

 

 

Bringing up the Latin roots aids my point if anything. How do you relate knowledge with instinct? To know anything you have to be aware of your cognitive processes. I don't "know" how to swallow food for example, it's an innate ability.