Have you heard? A new generation of robots may be just around the corner. As the ScienceDaily piece words it:
The first prototype robots capable of developing emotions as they interact with their human caregivers and expressing a whole range of emotions have been finalised by researchers. [link; all emphases mine]
Robots developing emotion? Isn’t that somehow oxymoronic? Robots are machines and machines don’t have feelings. Right?
More about the breakthrough machines robots:
The robots are capable of expressing anger, fear, sadness, happiness, excitement and pride and will demonstrate very visible distress if the caregiver fails to provide them comfort when confronted by a stressful situation that they cannot cope with or to interact with them when they need it.
Oh boy. Pardon my emotional reaction here, but . . . crap. I’m having trouble coping right now. There is just so much to this topic to be skeptical about. And there certainly is that crucial element that, when pushed to it’s logical extreme, challenges my own understanding of being and self.
First off, human emotion is tremendously complex. An “emotion” can include a few or most of the following incomplete list of changes to: facial expression, gestural expression, vocal qualities, posture, muscle tone, heart rate, blood pressure, hormone and neurotransmitter levels, blood flow to specific regions of the brain resulting in what has been called a “priming” of types of memories/thoughts, etc.
Beyond the measurable, physical changes, emotions are a social phenomenon. Only social animals develop and express emotions. It seems the development in robots has smartly focused on this social aspect. But it’s the personal element that I wonder about. And this is the element we can’t really verify. Not now.
Consider this claim from the write-up:
[T]hese robots differ from others in the way that they form attachments, interact and express emotion through bodily expression.
Sure, they may seem to form attachments. But are they only “going through the motions”? Are these robots merely very good mimics?
Granted, they may be a real step in the direction of creating “beings” that learn and respond on many levels, just as we do. Machines that can have motives and undergo fluctuations in their intent and energy level, among other things. And as these robots develop, thinkers like you and I will be forced to wonder when mimicry crosses the line to a “real” thing.
Sure, humans are made of flesh, and robots are not. But when it comes down to the very nitty-gritty, are we not just incredibly elaborate meat machines? In suspecting that robots could never have true emotions, am I merely being xenophobic; is my innate instinct to be alarmed by potential deceit (as all we hyper-social primates are) merely being triggered? Don’t be fooled by the robot! It isn’t really a person. It is deceiving you!
At this point in time, I have very strong doubts about robots developing what we might call true emotion. But I don’t know. When I think about it . . . Why not? No, we aren’t talking about an evil engineer using a syringe to magically inject a soul into his contraption of sheet metal, stainless steel bolts, and tangles of wire. It’s much more complicated than that.
And soul, what is that? I don’t believe in it. Not as something distinct from the workings of an animal body. But what about the personal part. That dynamic but not fully plastic, distinct agency we perceive as “soul,” as an individual’s persisting essence?
I don’t know.
And frankly, I’m a bit confused as to why anyone would want to develop or own such a robot. Still. With the progressive development of these . . . machines many, many important questions are being raised.
> Related Posts
Tags: behavior, emotion, philosophy
Leave a Reply