by "Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
Published 02/03/2017 at 01:55
by "Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
Published 02/03/2017 at 01:55
Tags: Philosophy
; Trigger Warning
; WestWorld
; consent
; artificial
; intelligence
; morality
; ethics
STARS: 0
This post contains topics that could be triggers.
I have an interest in Philosophy, and WestWorld has gotten me thinking. WestWord is an HBO show based on a novel by Michael Crichton where there is a theme park populated by AI controlled Androids that have interactions with the guests in a similar vein to an open world video game. The Androids in WW are a highly advanced AI that follow the laws of robotics 1) A robot cannot harm a human being. 2) A robot will always follow instruction from a human being unless that instruction violates law one. 3) A robot will always try to preserve it’s existence unless that action violates law one or two. These AI don’t know they are programmed to serve and were made without free will. There are scenes in the show of intercourse between quests to the park and androids. My question to you Opponauts is if these sexual acts with the androids of the park are consensual or nonconsensual? These AI can’t really make decisions or exhibit free will so is there “consent” actually consent because they can’t say no. As a parallel to this, assuming the AI can consent, would a guest with a significant other having sex with a consenting android partner be infidelity? Remember, these AI believe they’re sentient beings with the ability to choose.
"Wheelerguy" (wheelerguy)
02/03/2017 at 02:09, STARS: 2
Last I checked the Hosts are programmed to bone, so it is, technically, consensual sex, unless they become self-aware or are rewritten to refuse.
"Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
02/03/2017 at 02:11, STARS: 0
but the Hosts aren’t consenting, their programmers are. that’s like saying “here, have sex with my sister. Don’t worry about what she says, I say it’s okay.”
"Flavien Vidal" (flyingfrenchy)
02/03/2017 at 05:11, STARS: 1
They are machines... Unless these machines start developping an actual conscience, it’s like fucking a dryer or a pair of shoes. Main problem with this being that they actually do start developping a consicence. Once they do, it becomes completely different as they become actual living beings.
"StndIbnz, Drives a MSRT8" (stndibnz1)
02/03/2017 at 07:10, STARS: 2
But they don’t have full consciousness, they are just robots. It’s kinda like fucking a vacuum cleaner, that vibrates.
"Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs" (yowen)
02/03/2017 at 08:24, STARS: 0
But a sister is a real person. A host is a robot. Most people find dragoning offensive, but they don’t feel the need to ban it by law because they feel bad for the car, they don’t give a shit, they mostly think “that dude is weird as hell”. Now you hear of someone fucking a robot, it’s essentially the same. Some people may take issue with it on religious or fidelity grounds. But I think morally or legally there really isn’t anything wrong. The hosts do act thoroughly confused at times though, but isn’t that just a programmed emotion?
"Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
02/03/2017 at 11:55, STARS: 0
a vacuum cleaner can’t develop an emotional bond nor does is believe it’s a conscious being.
"Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
02/03/2017 at 11:56, STARS: 0
the problem with that argument is that the androids believe they have free will and a consciousness even though in reality they don’t.
"Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
02/03/2017 at 12:04, STARS: 0
Legally, sure, they’re machines and machines serve. But I feel it’s morally wrong. The Hosts believe they are living beings, with free will and a conscience. And to exploit something that has emotion and can feel empathy without needing consent because they cannot give said consent is wrong. It would be similar to getting consent from someone who is intoxicated.
"Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs" (yowen)
02/03/2017 at 14:32, STARS: 0
Belinda is special, she gets me, she is real.
"Yowen - not necessarily not spaghetti and meatballs" (yowen)
02/03/2017 at 14:37, STARS: 0
That’s a good point. But if we unpack it a bit more, it’s still a machine created by humans to feel said empathy and emotion. The intangible thing that humans have, maybe a “soul” or “true consciousness” is something that they lack. God, I feel dirty trying to justify robot rape. I really do feel you have a legitimate point and just want to figure out counterpoints, haha.
One more: they are programmed to respond to words/gestures from the guests to determine whether they’d like to have sex with them, conversely they also respond to certain words/gestures that leads them to go into I’m-being-raped mode. So is that really emotion? Or something that seems so close to emotion that we the viewer are swayed into feeling it’s rape?
Finally, a point that agrees with you: the act of raping them seems so incredibly real that it shouldn’t be legal. Indulging that craving in Westworld could lead to indulging it in real life after you can’t afford to go to Westworld anymore, it’d be pretty much like an addicting drug at that point. Much like a person hooked on prescription drugs will switch to Heroin because it’s cheaper and easier to get.
"Flies With Thunderbirds" (the-raven)
02/04/2017 at 12:13, STARS: 0
Simply creating hyper intelligent beings is ethically questionable. Michael Crichton used the question of “should humanity create” as a common theme for many of his books and it always end poorly.