Replicants

[Rich86]

In the film Bladerunner machines are made that look human, sound human, feel human and they are called replicants...the machines are capable of thought, emotion and, if given human memories can be tricked into thinking they actually are human. The machines are completely indistuigishable from humans and the only way to tell if someone is a replicant is by a special test involving the eyes.

Here's what I thought would make a good discussion....

If we could make such machines today, and if someone did make such machines today - would we give them the same rights as we give ourselves? Should we give them the same rights? Could we justify treating them as machines and using them to work in dangerous conditions - could we justify (as in the movie) building in a 'failsafe' into their programming that reduces their life span to only 5 years? How would you personally react to these machines?

[MaximiIian]

This is a tough one for me. On one hand, they're essentially persons. They have sapience under any discernible definition.
On the other hand, they're not humans. I define a human, as I would any other animal, genetically.

So. I'd say they would be legal persons, but not human persons.

[Rich86]

I'd say they would be legal persons, but not human persons.

Fair point - do you think you could say; fall in love with one? Would you risk your life to save one if you had become friends with them?

[Augment]

Why make robots that resemble humans, you can geneticly enhance humans instead.

[Rich86]

Well, a robot could withstand conditions humans could not - I suppose also robots could come pre-programmed not to commit crimes.... people might want to buy them to work in factories, or to act as butlers or maids....people might want to buy themselves their 'perfect partner' - there's tons of reasons why people would want lifelike human robots - and I'm sure when the technology is available plenty of businesses will want to make money from it.

[Tankbuster]

A human is a complicated biological machine.
So, in principle, if you could replicate all those biological circuits with nanotechnology, you would have a human, period.

This is from a materialist worldview, of course.

[Frédéric Chopin]

From the description you gave, it seems to me that any differences between these replicants and humans are rather trivial. I don't see how we could reasonably justify giving artificial humans less rights than naturally occurring humans. Simply being artificial doesn't change the fact that they have the same mental capacity as humans, and that all the reasons for ethical treatment of humans apply to them.

Fair point - do you think you could say; fall in love with one? Would you risk your life to save one if you had become friends with them?

I find Nagato Yuki very moe. Does that count?

A human is a complicated biological machine.
So, in principle, if you could replicate all those biological circuits with nanotechnology, you would have a human, period.

Exactly, it would be senseless descrimination based on minor mechanical differences.

[Taiji]

If I had all the parts needed and constructed a human being, I would not consider giving them less rights due to the manner in which they became alive.

The whole is not greater than the sum of it's parts when the model you have of it is good enough to reproduce the whole from it's parts.

[Thanatos]

However, an important thing to realize is that robots do not think in the same way as humans do. They might look very human, and act like one, but they themselves aren't really human.

Still, I don't believe in treating them second-class.

[Helm]

I'd give human rights to anything that could pass the Turing Test if it were up to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test

Another 20 years to go till we have fully sentient machiones is the prediction, Blade Runner wasn't that far out after all. Same goes for the Terminator films. The Matrix was pretty much bang right on.

[Frédéric Chopin]

However, an important thing to realize is that robots do not think in the same way as humans do. They might look very human, and act like one, but they themselves aren't really human.

I don't think that's necessarily true. With sufficient technology you could create a device that functions in the same way as a human, as Tankbuster described. That seems to be what is described in the OP. It states that they can feel emotion and thought sufficiently similar to human thought and emotion that they are indistinguishable from humans even to themselves.

[Gromovnik]

I would treat them as metal (or whatever crap they're made of).

[Helm]

Replicants from Blade Runner are organic as far as I know. Though not in the original book the film was based on.

[Aulus]

Well, if we could build Replicants, and the only way to tell the difference is by a special test with the eyes, I see no reason to make them second class citizens. Walking down the street, you'd be none the wiser. If they think, feel, sound, and look like us, and the only difference is that they are mechanical and we organic, then I don't think there is enough jusification for any discrimination.

[Gromovnik]

So, if we're going to give human rights to machines, what's the point in building them? I mean, we have more then enough humans on this planet.

[Angrychris]

New age slavery which wouldnt fly for labor reasons

[Helm]

The most likely way it would end up would be like droids from Star Wars. People would acknowledge their right to exist but they wouldn't be given any kind legal status or respect.

[MaximiIian]

So, if we're going to give human rights to machines, what's the point in building them?

For the lulz.

Why make robots that resemble humans, you can geneticly enhance humans instead.

Why not both?

The most likely way it would end up would be like droids from Star Wars. People would acknowledgetheir right to exist but they wouldn't be given any kind legal status or respect.

I always felt the droids got dicked in that regard. The universe of Star Wars is a harsh one, indeed.

However, an important thing to realize is that robots do not think in the same way as humans do. They might look very human, and act like one, but they themselves aren't really human..

OP already covered that. For this situation, we assume that they can and do think like humans, express emotions like love, pain, fear, guilt, etc. I mean, if they're capable of human thought, I think they'd be just as susceptible to our same mental weaknesses and strengths.
Going from that, I don't think it's too impossible that replicants might have mental disorders just like we do.

[Aetius]

I am convinved our destiny is to create better and better machines, use them to work for us (enslave them). For awhile the entire notion that humans must work will go out the window, as we create a society that is built upon slave labor of machines.

However after a time these machines would become more human like and eventually surpass us in our weakness and we will be overthrown in our own folly.

It may sound crazy right now, but if you actually take awhile to think about our current levels of progress then it seems inexorable.

[Helm]

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

As long as you hardwire everything you build of this nature with the "Three Laws of Robotics" you should avoid the whole being overthrown by machines situation.
For a military guard robot you would have to change the laws to this. It would still help to prevent an uprising either way.

1. A robot will not harm authorized Government personnel but will terminate intruders with extreme prejudice.
2. A robot will obey the orders of authorized personnel except where such orders conflict with the Third Law.
3. A robot will guard its own existence with lethal antipersonnel weaponry, because a robot is bloody expensive.