Major Benefactors
Bina Aspen &
Martine Rothblatt

Curator: Bruce Duncan
History of posts

Robot Rights: Are we human yet?


Its sounds far fetched that one day the right to marry between a human and a robot will be debated as depicted in the film “Bicentennial Man”, where Robin Williams portrayed his struggle as robot (for 200 years) to be recognized as human.   Will “fleshism” be the next form of bigotry as we become more integrated with our technology (artificial retinas, prosthetic legs,neural implant chips)? It’s hard not to see the common elements in today’s fight by GLBTQ advocates and allies for the right to marry. These issues challenge us to think differently about long held definitions of marriage, will someday we be asked to look with new perspective on what it means to be “human”? What do you think about the idea of  rights for intelligent machines?

2 Responses to “Robot Rights: Are we human yet?”

  • As much as I feel for this machine in that in real life he would have felt as if he should be granted the right to marry a human; I remember that I wrote similar laws in my self-written and compiled (since the year 2000) Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights 2000. In reality, I guess 2020 or 2045 would have been more like-it. What can I say other than I’ve always been ambitious? LOL

    Here is that very portion I wrote way back in the year 2000;
    ——————————————————————

    Machine Human beings, and AI / other life-forms:

    AI and other human-like or humanoid life-forms that did not originate as a human

    being while still possessing a heart, a brain with EEG waves similar to that of a

    human brain sending and receiving signals interpreted between a machine to human

    or human to machine interface and other vital organs involved in

    creating the emotion of love, desire, and companionship as well as

    social abilities including the desire for religion or the desire to

    have none; may not under any condition marry their opposite. meaning, a

    human being could never marry AI and consider it a legal union with all

    the rights therein. The human partner would be required to convince the

    court that the AI or other life-form has learned and evolved to the

    state of love or nirvana with regard to this one human, and not merely

    humans altogether, as this might be deemed an issue with sexual

    relations and health where the human being is concerned as far as

    health and wellness. Even given this leniency, it would have to be

    proven at the humans’ own expense and upon approval of their

    explanation by the high court, as to whether a form of artificial

    evolution as initiated and acted out without the assistance of any

    technology- that the AI has grown to love or care for specifically,

    this one human and to also use current immigration laws to determine if

    the AI actually knows enough about this one human to consider

    themselves ready to make the life of this human being better and not…

    Please visit the blog and comment if you like what you’ve read thus far.

    Olivia

  • Very profound question. I think it is a certainty that people will want to marry across substrate lines. Already, in Japan, there are guys in love with life-size dolls. Since Dan Kolak points out that I am You, I don’t see why substrate should matter.

Leave a Reply

*