Killing a robot

[Sepka]

Still pulling legs off spiders, are you?

I watched the video and found it mildly amusing. Clever programming, but it's a machine FFS!

Actually I'm contending that both practices are wrong. I may not have expressed myself terribly well.

And it's obviously a machine, yet it adapts and learns, and tries to avoid being hurt. Leaving aside the physical differences (silicon instead of protein, etc) how is the Pleo's reaction to abuse any different than a spider's? If it's wrong to torture the spider, why is mistreating a Pleo morally neutral?

[Seamus OBlimey]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self. Well, you might but I don't.

The Pleo is a machine designed by humans to play on human emotions. It doesn't feel, it just displays programmed reactions. In fact it might be morally right to destroy it before it does too much damage.

[FourthBase]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self. Well, you might but I don't.

It has a minute fraction of actual spirit. Robots have zero.

The Pleo is a machine designed by humans to play on human emotions. It doesn't feel, it just displays programmed reactions. In fact it might be morally right to destroy it before it does too much damage.

Indeed, that was my first instinct: Destroy these kinds of robots.

[smiths]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self.

It has a minute fraction of actual spirit.

ah, to know the unknowable unknowns...

tell me, as animals decrease in size/complexity, where is the line that divides the 'spirit' animals from the ones with none or a minute fraction?

[FourthBase]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self.

It has a minute fraction of actual spirit.

ah, to know the unknowable unknowns...

tell me, as animals decrease in size/complexity, where is the line that divides the 'spirit' animals from the ones with none or a minute fraction?

Somewhere between inanimate matter and animate matter. A robot is purely inanimate matter. A spider, for example, is not inanimate matter. I'm not necessarily saying spiders have a soul or a sense of self, lord no. But they have a tiny little something of spirit (spirit meaning "life") that robots absolutely don't have. That's pretty obvious. They even have something plants don't have -- and although that's less obvious, it's still fairly easy to discern. Intentionality, the most rudimentary beginnings of a nervous system, etc. Is any of this shit measurable, calculable? Probably not, not today anyway. But just because it's currently immeasurable doesn't mean it's not also undeniable.

[annie aronburg]

Do other creatures employ torture as much as humans and their domestic cats?

When I was little my brother and I would capture a fly with the aid of a handkerchief. I would pluck a hair from my head, tie a tiny loop in the end and pull it around the fly's neck, enough to make a little "leash." Then we would amuse ourselves by taking the fly for a "fly" around the house or into the garden.

My father found one of these bugs dead in the window sill and gave us a very stern talking-to about never torturing animals, even insects. It's ok to kill a fly when it bites or annoys you, but it's death must be quick, not slow.

How about watching a video of someone torturing or dismembering a Real Doll? Any harm there?

I think torturer, tortured and voyeur are all negatively affected.

Annie Aronburg

[Sepka]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self.

When we get right down to it, no-one actually has proof that anyone other than themselves is conscious, or has a sense of self. We have to proceed on the best evidence available to us. I think it's implausible at best that a spider would have a sense of self, but I have no proof. By the same token, though, we may also be wrong about the Pleo being unaware.

[FourthBase]

Do other creatures employ torture as much as humans and their domestic cats?

When I was little my brother and I would capture a fly with the aid of a handkerchief. I would pluck a hair from my head, tie a tiny loop in the end and pull it around the fly's neck, enough to make a little "leash." Then we would amuse ourselves by taking the fly for a "fly" around the house or into the garden.

My father found one of these bugs dead in the window sill and gave us a very stern talking-to about never torturing animals, even insects. It's ok to kill a fly when it bites or annoys you, but it's death must be quick, not slow.

How about watching a video of someone torturing or dismembering a Real Doll? Any harm there?

I think torturer, tortured and voyeur are all negatively affected.

Annie Aronburg

Your father was right, and so are you.

And part of what the conversation about Pleo, spiders, real dolls, etc leads to is...Movies, television, video games. Same principles at work. Semi-desensitization is still 100% more desensitization than no desensitization at all.

[Et in Arcadia ego]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self.

When we get right down to it, no-one actually has proof that anyone other than themselves is conscious, or has a sense of self.

Sweet! Sepka's dug out the Nihilist back-door.



Seriously, though, I think a point is being missed here. It's not the recipient of the torture that's important here, its the intentional act of the individual.

[FourthBase]

We don't know whether a spider has any sense of self.

When we get right down to it, no-one actually has proof that anyone other than themselves is conscious, or has a sense of self.

Sweet! Sepka's dug out the Nihilist back-door.



Seriously, though, I think a point is being missed here. It's not the recipient of the torture that's important here, its the intentional act of the individual.

Bingo! Et's got Bingo!

But isn't there also the complacency/complicity of a 3rd party, the viewer?

[Sepka]

Sweet! Sepka's dug out the Nihilist back-door.

IIRC, the sign over the door said "Solipsism". It's intuitively obvious that it's wrong, yet it can't be rationally disproven, much like the assertion that a spider might be self-aware.

Seriously, though, I think a point is being missed here. It's not the recipient of the torture that's important here, its the intentional act of the individual.

That's only true if we grant that the Pleo doesn't function at the level of an insect. I'm not so sure that it doesn't. It makes no difference whether it was built or naturally evolved. If it can know that it's being hurt, then it's wrong to hurt it for amusement.

[Et in Arcadia ego]

Seriously, though, I think a point is being missed here. It's not the recipient of the torture that's important here, its the intentional act of the individual.

Bingo! Et's got Bingo!

But isn't there also the complacency/complicity of a 3rd party, the viewer?

Absolutely. That's probably why I'm not interested in seeing the video myself. I kinda feel like watching it sanctions the act however surreal it is with a non-being. Matter of fact I'm sure of it. I remember my reaction to seeing the beheading videos that came out of Iraq and I don't need to go down that road again.

Its just plain old Human Ugliness. I already know it exists, no point in honoring it further with more token acknowledgments.

[Et in Arcadia ego]

That's only true if we grant that the Pleo doesn't function at the level of an insect.

I disagree. Who here wouldn't feel that something was amiss watching a child simulate torture/abuse against one of their stuffed animals?

If it can know that it's being hurt, then it's wrong to hurt it for amusement.

Or any other reason for that matter. Sepka and Arcadia agree again on something. This is no good, buddy.

People will say we're in love.

[erosoplier]

A spider is a real creature.

A "Pleo" is a fake creature. It can't know it is being hurt. It can only pretend to know something.

I was reluctant to watch the "torture" video, but I was worried over nothing. The Pleo has no feelings, it only has imitation feelings. Its imitation feelings appear real and elicit a response from us as a measure of the skill of the real creatures who created the "Pleo," the sophistication of the technology used in the imitation, and the degree to which we, the third party, are willing or susceptible to accept the imitation as being real.

I can imagine making a Pleo torture video myself - it's just a hunk of plastic and wires and motors, after all. There's plenty worse that goes on, day after day, which doesn't draw comment. My torture video would be in honour of drawing attention to the real.

[Sepka]

That's only true if we grant that the Pleo doesn't function at the level of an insect.

I disagree. Who here wouldn't feel that something was amiss watching a child simulate torture/abuse against one of their stuffed animals?

Something is definitely amiss in that case, and it is, as you contend, the intentions or thoughts of the child. In the case of a stuffed animal, though, there's no doubt that it's simply inanimate materials in the shape of something living. The stuffed animal can't experience distress. With the Pleo, that's not so certain.

If it can know that it's being hurt, then it's wrong to hurt it for amusement.

Or any other reason for that matter. Sepka and Arcadia agree again on something. This is no good, buddy.

People will say we're in love.

Calm your fears. I certainly believe that there are valid reasons to hurt others, even valid reasons to engage in torture. Entertainment or boredom most assuredly aren't among them, though.