This is a rich topic - a built device, machine, or computer program can evoke feelings and human responses. I think at that moment a choice is made to suspend disbelief. And, maybe we humans allow it to happen because we like it? We like to fall in love with our imaginings.
At what point does this topic of discussion become more than a fascinating study of psychological or philosophical delusion?
I think humans creating bonds with inanimate objects could be a side effect of our evolution as social animals. In the same way we see faces in random places, we are wired to form bonds with beings that look like us. That helps us building bonds with each other but also to form bonds with anything that displays human-like qualities.
@Conrad Gray, great piece. I have to admit that I probably have not given as much thought about the definition of “humanity” as I should have.
Obviously, it should extend to all the Homo sapiens species, but it should likely extend to our creations. Our AI creations, for example, should be included as at the end of the day, we want our AIs to be aligned with “humanity”
I haven't put that idea in the article (because I've got it after the article was published) but I can see a future in which we are too fixated on humanity being all Homo sapiens that we won't be open to extend it to other human-like in qualities beings. Instead, we could create a new category for "sentient beings" which could include humans as well as machines and some animals as their own categories.
I that case, we would see more connection with machines than with animals. We would see machines as different type of beings but equal to us. Or not. Science fiction is full of stories exploring these topics.
Great article, loved the Mass effect reference ahhaha
This is a rich topic - a built device, machine, or computer program can evoke feelings and human responses. I think at that moment a choice is made to suspend disbelief. And, maybe we humans allow it to happen because we like it? We like to fall in love with our imaginings.
At what point does this topic of discussion become more than a fascinating study of psychological or philosophical delusion?
I think humans creating bonds with inanimate objects could be a side effect of our evolution as social animals. In the same way we see faces in random places, we are wired to form bonds with beings that look like us. That helps us building bonds with each other but also to form bonds with anything that displays human-like qualities.
@Conrad Gray, great piece. I have to admit that I probably have not given as much thought about the definition of “humanity” as I should have.
Obviously, it should extend to all the Homo sapiens species, but it should likely extend to our creations. Our AI creations, for example, should be included as at the end of the day, we want our AIs to be aligned with “humanity”
I haven't put that idea in the article (because I've got it after the article was published) but I can see a future in which we are too fixated on humanity being all Homo sapiens that we won't be open to extend it to other human-like in qualities beings. Instead, we could create a new category for "sentient beings" which could include humans as well as machines and some animals as their own categories.
I that case, we would see more connection with machines than with animals. We would see machines as different type of beings but equal to us. Or not. Science fiction is full of stories exploring these topics.
Yes. We may also merge with these machines. If we are lucky.