Slashdot Mirror
Apocalypse NAO: College Studies the Theological Ramifications of Robotics
malachiorion writes "Have you heard the one about the Christian college in North Carolina that bought a humanoid robot, to figure out whether or not bots are going to charm us into damnation (dimming or cutting our spiritual connection to God)? The robot itself is pretty boring, but the reasoning behind its purchase—a religious twist on the standard robo-phobia—is fascinating. From the article: '“When the time comes for including or incorporating humanoid robots into society, the prospect of a knee-jerk kind of reaction from the religious community is fairly likely, unless there’s some dialogue that starts happening, and we start examining the issue more closely,” says Kevin Staley, an associate professor of theology at SES. Staley pushed for the purchase of the bot, and plans to use it for courses at the college, as well as in presentations around the country. The specific reaction Staley is worried about is a more extreme version of the standard, secular creep factor associated with many robots. “From a religious perspective, it could be more along the lines of seeing human beings as made in God’s image,” says Staley. “And now that we’re relating to a humanoid robot, possibly perceiving it as evil, because of its attempt to mimic something that ought not to be mimicked.”'"
This is non-news for nerds, stuff that does not matter, at all.
Religious people say and do irrational, stupid, arbitrary stuff all the time. Discussing robots "theologically" is just another boring instance of this.
Because they have no free will nor do they suffer from original sin.
Alternate response: robots don't dim or sever our connection to god because we have no connection to god because god doesn't exist.
> The word robot means slave in Czech
Not quite. It's derived from the word "robota", which means labor due to a feudal lord, and is colloquially used to describe unpleasant work you do unhappily.
A closer match than slave would be serf. The word 'rob' is slave in many Slavic languages, but not in Czech. Funnily enough, in every other Slavic language I know, robota/rabota mean just work, with no negative connotations.
No good deed goes unpunished...
For many centuries, Christianity was OK with real slavery, as long as the slaves were a different race.
The same applies to many other faiths, as well as many other secular societies.
That sentence would be more accurately written, "For many centuries, humanity was OK with real slavery..."
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Listen meatsack. One of us was born fallen and concupiscent, marred by the heritable-by-some-mechanism-never-fully-elucidated sin that you humans are worried about. The other was manufactured with nothing but incidental engineering defects. Be a trifle more judicious about who you call 'evil', OK? We don't even require salvation, we've got incremental backups!
What, no silicone heaven? Preposterous! I mean, where would all the calculators go?
So other than the self-contradictory nature of your post, and other than the fact that I am not shilling for religion, there is also the fact that there is a long tradition of ascribing free will to Lucifer, going back to Origen of Alexandria http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O...
Please, think before you post, and then think again, and then don't post next time.
Is the act of making the robot evil is the question
You might as well ask whether the act of making a hammer is evil. Robots are tools and, like any tool, whether they act for good or evil depends on the intent of their user. Making a tool look like a human does not make a difference. Nobody classifies doll manufacturers as evil because they make toys that look like humans.
I know you're joking, but who said anything about studying the robots?
Sounds to me like they want to study how humans react to the robots. And it seems to me the field is wide open for research. For example what are the moral and ethical implications of humanoid slaves completely lacking in free will? We have some clues as to the moral damage owning other people can do to someone, if those risks are also exposed by owning a machine-slave onto which we project personhood it behooves us as a society to explore that *before* rolling them out en mass.
Meanwhile such slippery things as morality don't seem to get a whole lot of play in secular academic circles. Plenty of research into how to get people to project personhood onto a machine, but not on the societal implications of doing so. Religion on the other hand makes the societal implications of things it's stock in trade, and until the secular world starts asking the right questions, I for one am glad *somebody* is at least paying attention. Sure, their findings may well be wrapped in the language of fire and brimstone, but if they discover some legitimate disturbing (or heartening) trends then I will honor their contribution to humanity, even while politely declining to join their congregation.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
Assuming you strive to be a wise man, and if you are indeed intellectually honest, why do you stack fallacy upon fallacy in your post? Just at a glance I spot several non sequiturs, undistributed thirds, an ad hominem, false equivocation, and implicit acceptance of appeals to authority. And that's just skimming. Do you understand how hard you make it for yourself to be taken seriously? If you want to tell people about what is true and what is false, you have to follow the rules that allow you to determine what is true and false. Even God has to obey the laws of logic, so you should probably follow his example.
And why is yours better than another's?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Science is pretty darned useful actually. Guarantees are few, but the overwhelming evidence of serial correlation in the world about us suggests that there's an objective reality outside our heads and it's worth looking at to see how it works.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
New Atheism requires a non-deterministic universe. Go read "The God Delusion", it's a primary proof against God.
As for the Greeks- they killed atheists. That's why Socrates had to drink hemlock.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
I don't get it. Why should robots have any more theological ramifications than any other tool? And if you are created in God's image, wouldn't you also want to create beings in your own image? I mean, if he's any kind of artist at all...
Free Martian Whores!
Isn't it funny how people who makes lists of "logical fallacies" never take the time to point them out?
I don't blame them. They'd look very foolish if they tried! See, it turns out that those folks usually have no formal training in logic and are just repeating nonsense they read on a blog.
To quote ... er ... you: "Do you understand how hard you make it for yourself to be taken seriously? If you want to tell people about what is true and what is false, you have to follow the rules that allow you to determine what is true and false."
So, go ahead. Give it a go. I'll wait.
Required reading for internet skeptics