Godless Humanoid Robots

"Nature (the art whereby God hath made and governs the world) is by the art of man, as in many other things, so in this also imitated, that it can make an Artificial Animal. For seeing life is but a motion of Limbs, the beginning whereof is in some principal part within, why may we not say, that all Automata (Engines that move themselves by springs and wheels as doth a watch) have an artificial life? For what is the Heart, but a Spring; and the Nerves, but so many Strings; and the Joints, but so many Wheels, giving motion to the whole Body, such as was intended by the Artificer? Art goes yet further, imitating that rational and most excellent work of nature, Man."

Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, 1651

What do you think defines humanity?  When do you think a robot can be defined as a "sentient" being? Are we not, by definition, robotic organisms put together by God, with the only difference being that our parts are made up of cellular material we call flesh?  If we give a robot a lifelike, reasoning brain capable of feeling and experiencing like any other sentient being, then doesn't this define it as a lifeform?  I can't help but imagine us as being the humanoid robotic constructs, of some higher life form, which have advanced to the point of creating our own robots to serve us.  Are we simply a step in the process of developing a self-perpetuating robot civilization?

Tanya Lewis, a staff writer for Live Science, posted an article called, "1st Fully Bionic Man Walks, Talks and breathes."  The article concerns itself with the world's first fully bionic man created by two roboticists of Shadow Robot Co., in England.  The article was a very interesting read at the end of which she puts forth the obvious "ethical and philosophical questions."

1. Does creating something so human like threaten notions of what it means to be human?

2. What amount of body enhancement is acceptable?

3. Is it wrong that only some people have access to these life-extending technologies?

I offer that question two is a direct result of a positive response to question one.  If creating something human-like is found to threaten our notions of anything, there will certainly be our usual overkill of discussion about how much of what is acceptable.

In the Spielberg movie AI (Artificial Intelligence), some Robots performed the functions of prostitutes.  Trying not to be indelicate, for my more genteel readers, but it would be hard to imagine any sexual arousal occurring with a unit constructed of nuts and bolts, much less performing any sexual contact.  The "romantic" construct would have to be as close to flesh and blood as Bubbles, Bambi, or "Boobs" LaRue, hanging out on the corner.

And what of question three, the life-extending properties of this technology?  Will it ease the burden of manual labor?  Will it allow us to enjoy fuller lives?  And will all this only be available to those who can afford it?  In the 2004 movie I Robot, loosely based on Isaac Asimov's novel, they answer this by giving everyone a robot.  The movie though, and the marvelous book by Asimov, also broached the question of what happens when robots become self-aware.

Let's take a look at some definitions, most taken from Wikipedia, for those of us that are not techies:

Bionics is the application of biological methods and systems found in nature to the study and design of engineering systems and modern technology.  As in the 1970's television series, The Bionic Woman?  We'll come back to that.

 Cyborg, short for "cybernetic organism," is a being with both organic and artificial parts.  My guess is that terming attractive Linsay Wagner a "bionic woman" was softer that calling her a cyborg.  By the definitions, bionics was the process used to create the final cyborg product.   

 A Robot is a mechanical or virtual agent, usually an electromechanical machine that is guided by a computer program or electronic circuitry.  By mimicking a lifelike appearance or automating movements, a robot may convey a sense of intelligence or thought of its own.

 Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive, or to experience subjectivity.  Philosophers used the concept to distinguish the ability to think (reason) from the ability to feel and experience sensations (sentience).

 Consciousness is a unitary concept that many philosophers have argued is understood intuitively by the majority of people in spite of the difficulty in defining it. Others, though, have argued that the level of disagreement about the meaning of the word indicates that it either means different things to different people, or else is an umbrella term encompassing a variety of distinct meanings with no simple element in common.

 Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects, or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as  human or animal perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event.

The Soul, in many religious, philosophical, psychological, and mythological traditions, is the incorporeal and, in many conceptions, immortal essence of a person, living thing, or object. According to some religions, including the Abrahamic religions in most of their forms, souls — or at least immortal souls capable of union with the divine — belong only to human beings. Other religions teach that all biological organisms have souls, and others further still that non-biological entities (such as rivers and mountains) possess souls, and several that conceive of a "world soul."

I have tried to list these in an order that will lead us from methodology and application to the combination of organic with artificial, and from this "cybernetic organism" to a truly "autonomous" robot.  After we arrive at the robot, things become ethically problematic as we consider sentience, consciousness, and awareness as they relate to robotics.  As a "spiritual" person, I think I'll throw in God, and muddy the water just a bit more.

Spirituality: There is no single, widely-agreed definition of spirituality.  Social scientists have defined spirituality as the search for the sacred, for that which is set apart from the ordinary and worthy of veneration, "a transcendent dimension within human experience -- discovered in moments in which the individual questions the meaning of personal existence and attempts to place the self within a broader ontological context.

We can begin to see how the technological and ethical questions of how human a robot can, or should, become.  It is more complicated than just inserting Data's "emotion chip," as was depicted in a Star Trek episode.  I found interesting the concept that non-biological entities can have souls.  This reminded me of the belief many have in the Spirit of Gaia, the Mother Earth that is the sentience or soul of our living, breathing, and abiding planet. 

The religious/spiritual question has everything to do with what we define the soul as.  Is being human simply dependent on the ability to differentiate between right and wrong, God and Satan, what is beautiful and what is ugly, the ability to have the human failings and faults like labeling others?  Is being human what happens when the robot looks inward in search of its creator, or to its creator's creator, and asks, "Why?"  And, more importantly, and frightening, for some, when the robot becomes self-aware and declares for itself, "I think, therefore I am."  Is it the desire for free will that defines humanity like the Cylon, or will robots favor a "hive mind" like the Borg?

"Machines smart enough to do anything for us will probably also be able to do anything with us; go to dinner, own property, compete for sexual partners. They might even have passionate opinions about politics or, like the robots on Battlestar Galactica, even religious beliefs. Some have worried about robot rebellions, but with so many tort lawyers around to apply the brakes, the bigger question is this: Will humanoid machines enrich our social lives, or will they be a new kind of television, destroying our relationships with real humans?"

Fred Hapgood, Discover Magazine, June 2008

If you follow Thomas Hobbs thinking (reference the opening quote, top of the page), one would have to admit we are nothing more than machines ourselves. What if we are not a genetic experiment or an accident of evolution? What if creating life really does lie in the hands of a higher power? What if genes really are the "engineered" building blocks of life, some higher life forms version of "bionical creativity engineering," or bionics? What if our own creators advanced, technologically, beyond the limitation of metal parts in favor of self-replicating genetic constructs capable of so much more? Maybe we have seen these robots, every time we look in a mirror and they are us. 

I would be interested in hearing an atheist view on this.  This is one of those subjects that many would rather stick their heads in the sand and ignore.  If you're my age, you might be able to do that and get away with it.  We will die soon.  If you are younger, this will become an issue. It will require your consideration as much as abortion and the death penalty, taxes, and health care.  Robots are here, and the most efficient form will be a tool-user with opposable thumbs.  The questions are:  What will it look like, and how "human" will you allow it to be? 

So, there you have it, as best as I can lay it out without the boring techie stuff.

Does robotic ethics boil down to the question of a soul?  Or is it the robot's awareness of self and the ability to ask, "Why?"  Maybe it boils down to whom it asks the question of - it's creator, or ours.

“The Master created humans first as the lowest type, most easily formed. Gradually, he replaced them by robots, the next higher step, and finally he created me, to take the place of the last humans.”

-- Issac Asimov, "I, Robot"

Editor's Note

(Re: disclaimer cum "get out of jail free" card)

Before you go getting your panties in a bunch, it is essential to understand that this is just an opinion site and, as such, can be subjected to scrutiny by anyone with a differing opinion. It doesn't make either opinion any more right or wrong than the other. An opinion, presented in this context, is a way of inciting others to think and, hopefully, to form opinions of their own, if they haven't already done so. This is also why, occasionally, I will present an "opinion" just to stir an emotional pot. Where it may sound like I agree with the statements made, I'm more interested in getting others to consider an alternate viewpoint. 

It is my fervent hope that we keep open and active minds when reading opinions and while engaging in peaceful and constructive discussion, in an arena of mutual respect, concerning those opinions put forth. After over twenty years with military intelligence, I have come to believe engaging each other in this manner and in this arena is the way we will learn tolerance and respect for differing beliefs, cultures, and viewpoints.

We all fall from grace, some more often than others; it is part of being human. God's test for us is what we learn from the experience, and what we do afterward.

Pastor Tony spent 22 years with United States Air Force Intelligence as a planner, analyst, briefer, instructor, and senior manager. He spent 17 years, following his service career, working with the premier, world renowned, Institutional Review Board helping to protect the rights of human subjects involved in pharmaceutical research. Ordained 1n 2013 as an "interfaith" minister, he founded the Congregation for Religious Tolerance in response to intolerance shown by Christians toward peaceful Islam. As the weapon for his war on intolerance he chose the pen, and wages his "battle" in the guise of the Congregation's official online blog, The Path, of which he is both author and editor. "The Path" offers a vehicle for commentary and guidance concerning one's own personal, spiritual, path toward peace and the final destination for us all. He currently resides in Pass Christian, Mississippi, where he volunteers as lead Chaplain and Chaplain Program Liaison, at the regional medical center.