Rights of life...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-01-2016, 12:27 PM
RE: Rights of life...
(31-01-2016 05:18 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Also, as a follow up to 2.


If we ever reach the point of being able to copy ourselves to a computer, to replace or substitute our wetware with hardware or artificial wetware, then the possibility of networked consciousness needs to be taken into account. The idea that humanity would be able to communicate on a speed and scale never yet seen, allowing the passage of not only information, but emotions, feelings, memories, and experiences? Would we, in effect, lose ourselves? Would existence as a hive mind be a net positive for our species? Was does being an individual even mean in an existence where such things as memories and experiences can be duplicated and are easily transferable pieces of discreet information? In such a scenario, where would you start and another distinct entity truly begin? Just what would be the nature of human consciousness, identify, or the very nature of the human experience be in such a world? Would we strive to hold onto our individuality, and if so, how would we do it? Possibly by adopting surrogate bodies, pretending to be the biological machines we once were, or would like to be?

The variety and inclusivity of networks like that could be amazing. Imagine your network-preserved individual mind being copied into a cooperative network with a similar copy of your spouse. Is that network analogous to a child? A marriage? Suppose the networked pair (or one of them) wanted to separate. Is that a divorce or a digital suicide?

And what if a larger group got trolls or other undesirables? What are the ethics of banning the existence of a particular consciousness within a selected group?

OP: I don't want human-ish slaves. Nor animal-ish ones honestly. I prefer the aesthetic argument to the moral one. It's creepy and gross, so please don't.

And I am all for rights of personhood for self-aware beings. Self-aware creatures should get an apropriate baseline standard of care, and access to decision making power in matters that affect them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I Am's post
03-02-2016, 02:57 PM
RE: Rights of life...
(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  Been musing over a few thoughts recently, sharing them here to see people's opinions.
I hope my answers give you some rule of a thumb to sort these questions for next time.

(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  1: If humanity could produce clones that would be made, raised and trained to be slaves, that have certain traits removed so they are basically emotionless and mindless drones, only interested in performing tasks, would you support such a thing and why?
You always have to think of the physical world in which this is supposed to take place.
How is that different from raising children in a bad, abusive, brainwashing way? Children or people in general aren't clones, but all that means is that their genes are a little randomized. Identical twins are clones. Maybe it's just semantics, but to "have certain traits removed" means that these traits were there to begin with, so destroying them is a form of attack or murder.

(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  2: If your consciousness could be copied and put into a machine that for all intents and purposes, performs exactly like a biological human being, that can recieve sensory information, has memories and can create new ones through experience and learning and has emotion, should that machine have the same rights as a biological human being? If so why?
If you think in terms of the physical world, consciousness is a product of matter and electricity flowing through the brain. Matter can't be copied, so copying consciousness is inconceivable. Copying a pattern in matter is possible, but that matter would have to be another brain (or something even more smart, living and sentient than a brain). A brain is already built by its consciousness, a brain without memories and experience would have lesser mass or fewer synapses, so you pretty much can't have an empty brain to copy things into. You'd have to use someone else's brain and that takes us back to point 1.

If something is as sentient as a brain or more, then it should be treated like a person or even better. You seem to have this idea that out there somewhere are silicon super-genius chips that are more sentient than brains yet they remain just silicon full of on-off transistors and can be mass-produced and copied by us mere monkeys. Physically, that is impossible.

There is nothing more physically complex than us, and if it was, it would be like us. We already have people closer to what you describe, we call them children or geniuses. Do you imply that identical twins or geniuses have no rights like other people? You surely don't, but that is where your reasoning leads to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 03:35 PM
RE: Rights of life...
(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  Been musing over a few thoughts recently, sharing them here to see people's opinions.

1: If humanity could produce clones that would be made, raised and trained to be slaves, that have certain traits removed so they are basically emotionless and mindless drones, only interested in performing tasks, would you support such a thing and why?

2: If your consciousness could be copied and put into a machine that for all intents and purposes, performs exactly like a biological human being, that can recieve sensory information, has memories and can create new ones through experience and learning and has emotion, should that machine have the same rights as a biological human being? If so why?

When I say "rights" I mean the rights that we all have in our respective countries. So that would be freedom, protection from harm and exploitation and the right to exist.

1: This sounds like the definition of a machine. A machine does not have consciousness. If a biological entity could be created that happened to be lack consciousness, then it would be more machine than life from a moral perspective. If, in order to create such a being, we transform a biological entity that would otherwise be capable of or would potentially develop a consciousness, then I would say that should not be allowed.

2: Just because a consciousness is cloned does not in my view make it less of a consciousness. A machine that acquired a consciousness in this way would be entitled to the same protections as any life would.

The challenge in applying my two answers though is determining whether we were successful. How would we really know that we have created a clone free of any consciousness, or that we successfully transferred a functioning consciousness (and not just a history of memories) to a machine?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 04:12 PM
Rights of life...
If a human being (including a clone) could be downgraded enough, would it's rights be no greater than that of a horse? What would be the moral difference between a downgraded clone and a mentally - retarded person? What would be the moral state of a society that would intentionally create defective humans out of its own children, to act as beasts of burden (if these defective clones are not the biological children of the society that creates them, what are they?).

I remember, 50 or so years ago, there was a sci-fi novel called "Davy" that used this premise. The defectives were the descendants of humans who had survived a nuclear war, but were genetically retarded. The unaffected humans used the defectives as beasts of burden and food, but it was a crime to have sex with them. That's about all I remember.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 05:01 PM
RE: Rights of life...
(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  When I say "rights" I mean the rights that we all have in our respective countries. So that would be freedom, protection from harm and exploitation and the right to exist.
I'm assuming that you mean Legal rights.

I tend to view laws as restrictions rather than granters of rights.
Laws tell us what we can't do, rather than what we can do.

I assume that we can do anything and everything (within the limits of what is physically possible) and then laws come along and restrict us down.

A reverse view of this is that government may view some things as fundamental rights so they create laws to restrict people interfering in these fundamental rights of others.

I understand that this is the context with which you are using the term "rights".


(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  1: If humanity could produce clones that would be made, raised and trained to be slaves, that have certain traits removed so they are basically emotionless and mindless drones, only interested in performing tasks, would you support such a thing and why?
Depends on how much it costs, what dangers it presents (could it rebel, would it compete with me for women?)

(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  2: If your consciousness could be copied and put into a machine that for all intents and purposes, performs exactly like a biological human being, that can recieve sensory information, has memories and can create new ones through experience and learning and has emotion, should that machine have the same rights as a biological human being? If so why?
I'm not sure why I would clone myself (even as a robot version). After cloning, we would be two seperate people.
Would the machine have the ability to fight us humans? Would it see us as a threat if we wanted to turn them off? Would they fight for what they percieve as their rights?
In order to keep the peace we might be forced to give them the same legal rights as everyone else.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 05:05 PM
RE: Rights of life...
(03-02-2016 02:57 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  Been musing over a few thoughts recently, sharing them here to see people's opinions.
I hope my answers give you some rule of a thumb to sort these questions for next time.

(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  1: If humanity could produce clones that would be made, raised and trained to be slaves, that have certain traits removed so they are basically emotionless and mindless drones, only interested in performing tasks, would you support such a thing and why?
You always have to think of the physical world in which this is supposed to take place.
How is that different from raising children in a bad, abusive, brainwashing way? Children or people in general aren't clones, but all that means is that their genes are a little randomized. Identical twins are clones. Maybe it's just semantics, but to "have certain traits removed" means that these traits were there to begin with, so destroying them is a form of attack or murder.

(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  2: If your consciousness could be copied and put into a machine that for all intents and purposes, performs exactly like a biological human being, that can recieve sensory information, has memories and can create new ones through experience and learning and has emotion, should that machine have the same rights as a biological human being? If so why?
If you think in terms of the physical world, consciousness is a product of matter and electricity flowing through the brain. Matter can't be copied, so copying consciousness is inconceivable. Copying a pattern in matter is possible, but that matter would have to be another brain (or something even more smart, living and sentient than a brain). A brain is already built by its consciousness, a brain without memories and experience would have lesser mass or fewer synapses, so you pretty much can't have an empty brain to copy things into. You'd have to use someone else's brain and that takes us back to point 1.

If something is as sentient as a brain or more, then it should be treated like a person or even better. You seem to have this idea that out there somewhere are silicon super-genius chips that are more sentient than brains yet they remain just silicon full of on-off transistors and can be mass-produced and copied by us mere monkeys. Physically, that is impossible.

There is nothing more physically complex than us, and if it was, it would be like us. We already have people closer to what you describe, we call them children or geniuses. Do you imply that identical twins or geniuses have no rights like other people? You surely don't, but that is where your reasoning leads to.

Hey Lumi, long time no see. How are you doing?

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 05:15 PM
RE: Rights of life...
My gut instinct on 1 was no way! Others in the thread have made good points on that.

On 2, regardless of whether it's a copy of a real person's conciousness, or one that was created, I think they have rights. I wouldn't want anyone to be able to say that I'm no longer allowed rights just because of the way I was born. If we truly can't differentiate an AI from regular human conciousness, what's the difference really?

I think when we start getting really good at AI, they won't have any rights at first, and will still be treated as computer programs. I truly believe it will eventually turn into a major civil rights issue just like any other.

The show Black Mirror recently released an episode from 2014 (it's the Christmas special with Jon Hamm) that touches on this subject. I highly recommend the entire series (only a few episodes), but this episode in particular. Some really scary stuff in there.

I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2016, 06:04 PM
RE: Rights of life...
(31-01-2016 04:52 AM)bemore Wrote:  Been musing over a few thoughts recently, sharing them here to see people's opinions.

1: If humanity could produce clones that would be made, raised and trained to be slaves, that have certain traits removed so they are basically emotionless and mindless drones, only interested in performing tasks, would you support such a thing and why?

2: If your consciousness could be copied and put into a machine that for all intents and purposes, performs exactly like a biological human being, that can recieve sensory information, has memories and can create new ones through experience and learning and has emotion, should that machine have the same rights as a biological human being? If so why?

When I say "rights" I mean the rights that we all have in our respective countries. So that would be freedom, protection from harm and exploitation and the right to exist.

In answer to question one, no I wouldn't. I don't believe in owning people or in Human sacrifice.

In answer to the second question, yes such a being would have rights if it functioned exactly like a biological organism. It is the fact biological organisms face the alternative of life or death, and therefor need values to survive, that is the basis of rights in my view.

Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. - Ayn Rand.

Don't sacrifice for me, live for yourself! - Me

The only alternative to Objectivism is some form of Subjectivism. - Dawson Bethrick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes true scotsman's post
04-02-2016, 06:09 AM
RE: Rights of life...
(03-02-2016 05:05 PM)Dom Wrote:  Hey Lumi, long time no see. How are you doing?
Thanks for asking. I'm economically stabilized if not comfortable, and I like my workplace, which is a big win (I test videogames) .
Otherwise, it's hard to tell. Whatever I'm doing, I need to keep doing it for many months to come. I'll hang out with Vosur this week, so his perspective would be interesting to both of us Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Luminon's post
04-02-2016, 09:40 AM
RE: Rights of life...
We have genetically engineered servants - they're called dogs. Tongue

living word
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: