Can Robots Make Ethical Decisions?

[cluelusshusbund]

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So do you thank consciousness is supernatural.???

I think this is caused by something transcendental best described by the intangible word "soul".

This comes inbuilt in living organisms.

Do you beleive thers an "entity" which is the cause of consciousness bein "inbuilt" into livin organisms.???

 

[Grim_Reaper]

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So you do thank that consciousness is supernatural.???



Do you thank the state of bein alive is supernatural.???

No it is not. It is being alive.

 

[raggamax]

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So do you thank consciousness is supernatural.???



Do you beleive thers an "entity" which is the cause of consciousness bein "inbuilt" into livin organisms.???

Yes thats what I believe in. Right or wrong who knows really.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

“ Originally Posted by Grim_Reaper
Consciousness is self awareness...

SO who could you program something that is intangible into a robot AI. ”

Origonaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So you do thank that consciousness is supernatural.???

No it is not it is a state of being alive nothing to do with a supposed soul.

Do you thank consciousness is nonpsychical.???

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So do you thank consciousness is supernatural.???

Do you beleive thers an "entity" which is the cause of consciousness bein "inbuilt" into livin organisms.???

Yes thats what I believe in. Right or wrong who knows really.

I dont thank anybody knows for certan ether... so why say you "beleive" in somptin when ther ant no verifiable evidence for it.???

 

[thinking]

Robots and computers are often designed to act autonomously, that is, without human intervention. Is it possible for an autonomous machine to make moral judgments that are in line with human judgment?

This question has given rise to the issue of machine ethics and morality. As a practical matter, can a robot or computer be programmed to act in an ethical manner? Can a machine be designed to act morally?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20090919/sc_livescience/canrobotsmakeethicaldecisions

the biggest problem though is this ;

can electronics learn ?

I had a chess game yrs ago , that if I played the same move over and over , the game adjusted and anticipated my move

 

[Dywyddyr]

the biggest problem though is this ;
can electronics learn ?

No.

I had a chess game yrs ago , that if I played the same move over and over , the game adjusted and anticipated my move

The programme "learned".

 

[kmguru]

the biggest problem though is this ;

can electronics learn ?

You mean electronics as in devices that has a flow of electrons?

 

[raggamax]

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So do you thank consciousness is supernatural.???

Do you beleive thers an "entity" which is the cause of consciousness bein "inbuilt" into livin organisms.???



I dont thank anybody knows for certan ether... so why say you "beleive" in somptin when ther ant no verifiable evidence for it.???

I don't need an evidence for each and everything that I come across. Some things are only meant to be felt not explained or proved I guess.

 

[Dredd]

One robot's ethics is another robot's sins.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Morality is a relative term and differ from person to person.
You can cause a robo to perform a moral action in the eyes of some.

A acton preformed by a robot woud only be preceived as moral in the eyes of som... do humans do any beter.???

Originally Posted by anuraganimax
....I really don't think it is possible to program consciousness of a soul into the robot. ”

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So do you thank consciousness is supernatural.???

Do you beleive thers an "entity" which is the cause of consciousness bein "inbuilt" into livin organisms.???

Originally Posted by anuraganimax
Yes thats what I believe in.

"I don't need an evidence for each and everything that I come across. Some things are only meant to be felt not explained or proved I guess."

Posted by cluelusshusbund
Do you thank humanity woud be beter served if the directon of its efforts to gane knowledge was based mor heavily on unevidenced personal beleifs than the scientific method.???

 

[raggamax]

A acton preformed by a robot woud only be preceived as moral in the eyes of som... do humans do any beter.???

Originally Posted by anuraganimax
....I really don't think it is possible to program consciousness of a soul into the robot. ”

Origionaly posted by cluelusshusbund
So do you thank consciousness is supernatural.???

Do you beleive thers an "entity" which is the cause of consciousness bein "inbuilt" into livin organisms.???

Originally Posted by anuraganimax
Yes thats what I believe in.

"I don't need an evidence for each and everything that I come across. Some things are only meant to be felt not explained or proved I guess."

Posted by cluelusshusbund
Do you thank humanity woud be beter served if the directon of its efforts to gane knowledge was based mor heavily on unevidenced personal beleifs than the scientific method.???

Hehehe. This is where the fun lies. Science and philosophy appear to be complementary entities to me. I agree with this-
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

 

[raggamax]

A acton preformed by a robot woud only be preceived as moral in the eyes of som... do humans do any beter.???

It seems to me that it is not possible to give a robo free will which a human has by programming unless you believe in those science fictions and movies. Unfortunately I have no answer for you if you ask what "free will" is and from where it originates.
It seems this "free will" is the key difference between a living and a non living thing and is a consequence of having a soul.

 

[joepistole]

http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/184070/ai_will_surpass_human_intelligence_after_2020?pp=1

It will be here soon.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Posted by cluelusshusbund
Do you thank humanity woud be beter served if the directon of its efforts to gane knowledge was based mor heavily on unevidenced personal beleifs than the scientific method.???

Science and philosophy appear to be complementary entities to me. I agree with this-
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

So i will know what you mean... give an esample of uneviidenced personal beleifs bein complementary to the scientific method.!!!

It seems to me that it is not possible to give a robo free will which a human has...

Posted by cluelusshusbund
You agree that a "moral" acton taken by a robot woud not be preceived as moral in the eyes of all humans... but nether are the moral decisons made by humans seen as moral by all humans.!!!

You clame humans have it... but what do you mean by "free-will"... the ability to make uninfluenced decisions... or what.???

 

[raggamax]

Posted by cluelusshusbund
Do you thank humanity woud be beter served if the directon of its efforts to gane knowledge was based mor heavily on unevidenced personal beleifs than the scientific method.???



So i will know what you mean... give an esample of uneviidenced personal beleifs bein complementary to the scientific method.!!!

Tell me are you into physics?

Posted by cluelusshusbund
You agree that a "moral" acton taken by a robot woud not be preceived as moral in the eyes of all humans... but nether are the moral decisons made by humans seen as moral by all humans.!!!

You clame humans have it... but what do you mean by "free-will"... the ability to make uninfluenced decisions... or what.???

As I already said b4 free will and its origin both are a mystery.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
So i will know what you mean... give an esample of uneviidenced personal beleifs bein complementary to the scientific method.!!!

Tell me are you into physics?

I quit school in 9th grade an ive never had a phsyics class but readin aboout physics here has been interestin... but i wont know if im into it enuff to undeerstan you'r esample until you give it

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
You clame humans have it... but what do you mean by "free-will"... the ability to make uninfluenced decisions... or what.??? ”

As I already said b4 free will and its origin both are a mystery.

Is free-will somptin you'r glad you have... an if so... why.???

 

[raggamax]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
So i will know what you mean... give an esample of uneviidenced personal beleifs bein complementary to the scientific method.!!!

I quit school in 9th grade an ive never had a phsyics class but readin aboout physics here has been interestin... but i wont know if im into it enuff to undeerstan you'r esample until you give it

Well there is a kind of split in the physics today. There are scientists who believe in current models of science and there are others who shun it. The reason they shun is more due to a philosophical reason than a scientific one.
Current theories are wildly successful and agrees well with scientific findings but are in aversion to philosophy of causality. The law of cause and effect which says a cause always precedes an effect. The mainstream theory says that there is no causality and the world we see is basically random at the core and the law of chance determines all. Some scientists have also suggested that this randomness is the cause of human free will. One of the giants Albert Einstein who had a hand in the creation of this theory himself shunned it afterward. This has led to creation of groups like NPA or Natural philosophy alliance which is group of physics professors,researchers and scientists who are dissatisfied with today's science.
They try to restore the law of causality back to physics by proposing new and better models than the established ones. Mainstream usually retorts by calling them cranks. Do you see now how philosophy can affect science.

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
You clame humans have it... but what do you mean by "free-will"... the ability to make uninfluenced decisions... or what.??? ”

Is free-will somptin you'r glad you have... an if so... why.???

I'll pass on this. Its hard to put it in words.

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
...give an esample of uneviidenced personal beleifs bein complementary to the scientific method.!!!

Current theories are wildly successful and agrees well with scientific findings...

Theories are based on scientific findins so its perty much a givin they will be agreeable wit each other.!!!

The law of cause and effect which says a cause always precedes an effect. The mainstream theory says that there is no causality and the world we see is basically random at the core and the law of chance determines all. Some scientists have also suggested that this randomness is the cause of human free will.
One of the giants Albert Einstein who had a hand in the creation of this theory himself shunned it afterward. This has led to creation of groups like NPA or Natural philosophy alliance which is group of physics professors,researchers and scientists who are dissatisfied with today's science.
They try to restore the law of causality back to physics by proposing new and better models than the established ones. Mainstream usually retorts by calling them cranks.

I didnt know any of that stuff.!!!

Do you see now how philosophy can affect science.

No... do you thank philosophy trumps facts.???

---------
Is free-will somptin you'r glad you have... an if so... why.???

I'll pass on this. Its hard to put it in words.

oK... how bout this which only requires a yes or a no:::

Is free-will somptin you'r glad you have.???

 

[raggamax]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
...give an esample of uneviidenced personal beleifs bein complementary to the scientific method.!!!

Theories are based on scientific findins so its perty much a givin they will be agreeable wit each other.!!!

Not as simple as you may think it is. The theories today are based more on deductions(weakest of scientific methods) and on speculation more than observable experimental data. That is why there are philosophical problems arising.

I didnt know any of that stuff.!!!

I figured it would be so.

No... do you thank philosophy trumps facts.???

Actually philosophy is not aversion to facts. Philosophy is often supported by facts, experiences and history.

Is free-will somptin you'r glad you have... an if so... why.???

oK... how bout this which only requires a yes or a no:::

Is free-will somptin you'r glad you have.???

Ya its probably the only thing which you can use against fate.