PM, We grant rights to humans because they are human, which (so far at least) is a clear easily-verified criterion (and if there are border cases that is what courts are for). It isn't because of "sentience" per se.
If, as you suggest, we should give rights to some future robots, we better have an equally precise definition that we can use to decide which ones are deserving of rights and which are just objects. I don't think "sentience" (as defined) is anywhere near precise enough for the purpose: "Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive, or be conscious, or to have subjective experiences. " We don't have agreed-on definitions for any of those things that we can apply to machines. Hopefully, people will think carefully about the consequences of experimenting with creations that have moral issues with being turned off. "Intelligence" doesn't by itself have any such implication in my opinion. Even possessing a detailed self-model isn't necessarily relevant. I'm not sure what is, though. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [agi] Robots and Slavery Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 20:50:27 -0800 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentience How do we know that Derek Zahn is sentient? He may not be. What is the test? Good question. ~PM. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [agi] Robots and Slavery Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 19:54:03 -0700 PM, What is "sentience"? How can you tell if a robot is sentient and thus deserving of rights? AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
