Scribd
Upload
108 views18 pages

Monsters, Robots, and Rights

The author puts forward his discovery of structure in artificial intelligence and its connection to natural life and looks at it in terms of the writers with which he was raised.

Uploaded by

Ian Beardsley
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
108 views18 pages

Monsters, Robots, and Rights

The author puts forward his discovery of structure in artificial intelligence and its connection to natural life and looks at it in terms of the writers with which he was raised.

Uploaded by

Ian Beardsley
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 18

Monsters, Robots, And Rights

Ian Beardsley
Monsters, Robots, And Rights

1
Mary Shelley, with her book Frankenstein (1818) has transformed me as a per-
son, which is indeed the purpose of literature, it is just that dierent writers con-
nect with dierent people. As a scientist who has discovered the connection of
natural life to artificial intelligence, her work has become pivotal to setting my
frame of mind. I have discovered the following,

Where we see on the left hand side of the equation the elements central to artifi-
cial intelligence and, on the right side the primordial precursors to natural life,
the amino acids which are the building blocks of natural life, and the com-
pounds of DNA responsible for the instructions of natural life.
It is at this point that we realize that getting carried away with the grandeur of our discov-
ery unchecked by a sense of human values, can result in a monster that can hinder hu-
man progress as opposed to favoring it. Mary Shelly has her character, Victor Franken-
stein saying,

I paused, examining and analyzing all of the minutiae of causation as exemplified in the
change from life to death, and death to life, until from the midst of the darkness a sudden
light broke in upon me a light so brilliant and wondrous, yet so simple, that while I be-
came dizzy with the immensity of the prospect of which it illustrated, I was surprised that
among so many men of genius, who had directed their inquiries toward the same science
that I alone should be reserved to discover so astonishing a secret

After days and nights of incredible labour and fatigue, I succeeded in discovering the
cause of generation and life; nay more, I became myself capable of bestowing animation
upon lifeless matter.

But in retrospect, the same scientist says:

I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inani-
mate body. For this I had deprived myself of rest and health. I desired it with an ardor that
far exceeded moderation, but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished,
and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart.
With this I see the warning in the creation of monsters. The term robot was invented
by Karl Capek and first appeared in his 1921 play, R.U.R. (Rossums Universal Ro-
bots). In this work, his robots were not electronic artificial intelligence, but biological
artificial intelligence, supposed soulless servants to humanity. But not to his character
Helena, who comes to visit Rossum to tell him she feels the robots have a soul, and
therefore feel the pain of their enslavement that she wants them to be freed. Kapek
used the idea of his robots to object to the enslavement of humanity by the rich, and
their justification for it by suggesting the poor dont have a soul.

This brings us to The Rights of Man, (1940) by H.G. Wells, a work that became pivotal
to the United Nations formation of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. He
wrote,

Since a man comes into this world through no fault of his own, since he is a joint inheri-
tor of the accumulations of the past, and since those accumulations are more than su-
cient to satisfy the claims that are here made on his behalf, it follows:

1) That every man without distinction of race or color is entitled to nourishment,


housing, covering, medical care and attention sucient to realize his full possibilities of
physical and mental development and to keep him in a state of health from his birth to
death

In the work he makes clear that when he says Man he means man and woman. Today
we use the word Humankind in place of Mankind. But they have alway meant the same
thing.
But now in 2017 that we face the prospect of making artificial intelligence, robots, that
are self-aware, that is are living beings, we have to ask if they have rights as well. Given
they do not require food, are stronger, and can think faster than humans, we come to
the realization that if they are given rights, they could destroy us. To solve this conun-
drum, Isaac Asimov, in his 1950 Book I, Robot, explores this issue introducing for the
first time The Laws of Robotics. They are:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human be-
ing to come to harm.

2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such or-
ders would conflict with the First Law.

3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not
conflict with the First or Second Laws.

Lets see how these law work as they unfold in his stories. In I, Robot, a robot comes to
believe that in handling a space station that the graphs and dials from which it receives
its orders are his creator, which he calls The Master, because humans beings being infe-
rior to robots, could not have created him, something superior, so he kicks humans out
of the control room and tells them he will not longer take orders from them, but rather
from the Master. The dialogue goes like this,
He turned to Powell. What are we going to do now?

Powell felt tired but uplifted. Nothing. Hes just shown that he can run the station
perfectly. Ive never seen an electron storm handled so well.

But nothings solved. You heard what he said of the Master. We cant,

Look, Mike, he follows the instructions of the Master by means of dials, instru-
ments, and graphs. Thats all we ever followed. As a matter of fact, it accounts for
his refusal to obey us. Obedience is the Second Law. No harm to humans is the
first. How can he keep humans from harm whether he knows it or not? Why, by
keeping the energy beam stable. He knows he can keep it more stable than we
can, since he insists hes the superior being, so he must keep us out of the control
room. Its inevitable if you consider the Laws of Robotics.

Sure, but thats not the point. We cant let him continue with this nitwit stu about
The Master.

Why not?

Because whoever heard of such a damned thing? How are we going to trust him
with the station, if he doesnt believe in Earth?

Can he handle the station?

Yes, but

Then whats the dierence what he believes!


The Story Of My Discovery

7
Copyright

Copyright 2017 by Entity Books

17

You might also like