If we had incredibly advanced robots that were just like humans...

[elman]

considering in simple terms the choice to believe or to do good vs evil

for an atheist, humans have complicated brains and their choices are governed by the mechanics of these brains and how they devolop

for the religious, humans have free choice regardless of the complexity of the brain

so for a religious person, the creator of the robot is responsible for its actions, and for the atheist the robot is responsible for its actions

Are you saying all atheist do not believe in the ability to chose to be loving or to be unloving to other people?

 

[randomman]

Are you saying all atheist do not believe in the ability to chose to be loving or to be unloving to other people?

please, keep this "jesus love" to yourself ... you are off track

 

[randomman]

Are you saying all atheist do not believe in the ability to chose to be loving or to be unloving to other people?

no ... what i am saying

considering in simple terms the choice to believe or to do good vs evil

for an atheist, humans have complicated brains and their choices are governed by the mechanics of these brains and how they devolop

for the religious, humans have free choice regardless of the complexity of the brain

so for a religious person, the creator of the robot is responsible for its actions, and for the atheist the robot is responsible for its actions

====

do not put words into my mouth .... nowhere i am talking about your "jesus love"

 

[quatona]

no ... what i am saying

considering in simple terms the choice to believe or to do good vs evil

for an atheist, humans have complicated brains and their choices are governed by the mechanics of these brains and how they devolop

for the religious, humans have free choice regardless of the complexity of the brain

so for a religious person, the creator of the robot is responsible for its actions, and for the atheist the robot is responsible for its actions

Apart from the conclusion being a non-sequitur it is demonstrably false.
The line between advocates and opponents of the concept "free agency" goes right across both the camps of theists and non-theists.

 

[elman]

no ... what i am saying

considering in simple terms the choice to believe or to do good vs evil

for an atheist, humans have complicated brains and their choices are governed by the mechanics of these brains and how they devolop

for the religious, humans have free choice regardless of the complexity of the brain

so for a religious person, the creator of the robot is responsible for its actions, and for the atheist the robot is responsible for its actions

====

do not put words into my mouth .... nowhere i am talking about your "jesus love"

When you are talking about good and evil you are talking about my Jesus love. I still seem to see you saying that Atheist believe humans chose good and evil based on how their brains have developed and their choices then would not be choices.

 

[lawtonfogle]

I think thats a very interesting quandary and one that should probably be decided before it becomes an actuality.
I would say yes, they would be sentient beings and should be treated as such. I would not advocate their creation though, I don't think humanity is ready for that. i think robots should be kept at a level just below sentience so that they can still be viewed as property. If you go above that there will be social consequences...such as, what is the punishment for killing a sentient robot?

Then I suggest you try to deter my interest. My sole (ok, main number one reason) for going into Computer Science, with a focus on Phsycology(so what I still can't spell it correct)/Logic/Ethics/Japanese (they are working on AIs of this type more than anyone else) is for that very reason. Personally, I think it would be fun to see the consequences. Especially if you couldn't tell the robot from a human till after it was killed.

And it may be like so many other things in life, you can prepare for the choice, but you will only be sure of it once you have made the choice.

 

[elman]

no ... what i am saying

considering in simple terms the choice to believe or to do good vs evil

for an atheist, humans have complicated brains and their choices are governed by the mechanics of these brains and how they devolop

for the religious, humans have free choice regardless of the complexity of the brain

so for a religious person, the creator of the robot is responsible for its actions, and for the atheist the robot is responsible for its actions

====

do not put words into my mouth .... nowhere i am talking about your "jesus love"

When you talk about good and evil you are talking about being loving or being unloving--as in my Jesus love.

 

[randomman]

When you talk about good and evil you are talking about being loving or being unloving--as in my Jesus love.

i appreciate the good intentions of christians to explain everything with the "God loves you" ... but it is irrelevant to what i am saying ... and there are equivilantly important attributes to God ... so you should not confine relation with God to love only

 

[stan1980]

Why bother giving a robot a personality? All it needs to do is to do its job. This may require some level of judgment, but that isn't the same thing as building a human personality.

The only jobs that it would be necessary to have a personality is for customer relations and the like, but even in those cases it'd probably be easier to just have a facsimile of a personality, and there wouldn't be much benefit to having the robot actually be "human."

There are many occupations where it might be useful to build a robot with human characteristics. For example, an actor, performer, a teacher, lecturer, policeman, lawyer, psychologist, psychiatrist, a prostitute or companion... the list goes on.

 

[brinny]

...i'd have her cloned to be an exact replica of me and i'd send her to work....

 

[quatona]

...i'd have her cloned to be an exact replica of me and i'd send her to work....

...and guess what she - an exact replica of you - would do?

 

[stan1980]

...and guess what she - an exact replica of you - would do?

Damn, you got there before me.

I can certainly think of better replicas to make than of myself!

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
...i'd have her cloned to be an exact replica of me and i'd send her to work....

...and guess what she - an exact replica of you - would do?

i dunno, be exceptionally brilliant and chase drug dealers?

 

[stan1980]

i dunno, be exceptionally brilliant

I thought you said it was going to be a replica of yourself?

 

[quatona]

i dunno, be exceptionally brilliant and chase drug dealers?

Well, she´d rather send you to do it on her behalf.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
i dunno, be exceptionally brilliant

I thought you said it was going to be a replica of yourself?

indeed.

 

[elman]

i appreciate the good intentions of christians to explain everything with the "God loves you" ... but it is irrelevant to what i am saying ... and there are equivilantly important attributes to God ... so you should not confine relation with God to love only

Actually there are no equivilantly important attributes to God other than love. God is love and His children are loving and our relationship with God is based on love and if there is no love there is no realtionship.

 

[variant]

and they had artificial intelligence, and showed emotions like humans, but were in fact made up of circuits and wires (like the terminator), is there any reason why we shouldn't treat them the same as normal human beings?

Humans are incredibly complex machines, if the complexity and detail in the makeup of a human being can be replicated then why would it make sense to treat them differently?