This has no real title that I could think of since it covers alot of things.
If a teacher is not present in the classroom then it may evolve to chaos, since people feel free not to follow the rules (that they truly know).
When the cat is away the rats dances on the table.
Once in a while our lives get...boring...nothing happens really...we don't feel very alive. When everything clatches and what is not seen get's more and more reasons to do so, then we might just have an accident.
To wake us up.
Or a near-call, so that we realise the importance. We only live once.
Suffering is - contradictory to traditional beliefs - essentially good for us, not too much of it, but a little suffering cleanses us and gets us on track.
This may be physical or psychological suffering, depending on what we really need.
Now, suffering is inevitable, we must suffer at times, cause everything is not perfect. Sure God could rule us with an iron hand, and we wouldn't be involved in any accidents, since they would be meaningless. But in order for us ourselves to avoid accidents and bad things, we must take to have free will and such things, could you really love a robot that you programmed to say 'hello' to you every morning? Quite hard, not? Sure a cat might appreciate it, but even the cat would soon realise that there is something missing, allthough it can move and say 'hello' in the morning, it isn't alive.
Alive in such means also free will. When something is 'alive' as I see it, then it got this mystical property that it becomes something, it evolves and gives meaning - something that we can identify with and something that gives us trust (somehow), we trust that it is 'one of us' and that we are 'one of them' (that are alive).
That we are just robots, is false. Not 'just' robots, but also alive.
If scientists make a robot that are essentially 'alive' then maybe we could identify ourselves with it. If a 'image' was alive so that it unpredetermined evolved it's own image to reflect the meaning of it's surroundings and other things that have this 'mystical property' then we might identify ourselves with it.
But 'life' is not to be tampered with, not too much anyway. A image that was essentially alive, has to be met with respect, cause maybe we would have to assume that it was aware of it's surroundings, if it was made by man, then they would have to face this. I cannot imagine the grief such a man would go through (since he would have to rely on the image to know if it was 'ok'), no, life is better left to God. That's why it could become immoral to create robots that essentially reflected human design and behaviour (or to make incomplete such robots, or to make robots knowing they would not be respected as 'one of us'). Remember, this doesn't have to be in the far future. It could happen tomorrow, we don't know when the breakthrough comes.
If a teacher is not present in the classroom then it may evolve to chaos, since people feel free not to follow the rules (that they truly know).
When the cat is away the rats dances on the table.
Once in a while our lives get...boring...nothing happens really...we don't feel very alive. When everything clatches and what is not seen get's more and more reasons to do so, then we might just have an accident.
To wake us up.
Or a near-call, so that we realise the importance. We only live once.
Suffering is - contradictory to traditional beliefs - essentially good for us, not too much of it, but a little suffering cleanses us and gets us on track.
This may be physical or psychological suffering, depending on what we really need.
Now, suffering is inevitable, we must suffer at times, cause everything is not perfect. Sure God could rule us with an iron hand, and we wouldn't be involved in any accidents, since they would be meaningless. But in order for us ourselves to avoid accidents and bad things, we must take to have free will and such things, could you really love a robot that you programmed to say 'hello' to you every morning? Quite hard, not? Sure a cat might appreciate it, but even the cat would soon realise that there is something missing, allthough it can move and say 'hello' in the morning, it isn't alive.
Alive in such means also free will. When something is 'alive' as I see it, then it got this mystical property that it becomes something, it evolves and gives meaning - something that we can identify with and something that gives us trust (somehow), we trust that it is 'one of us' and that we are 'one of them' (that are alive).
That we are just robots, is false. Not 'just' robots, but also alive.
If scientists make a robot that are essentially 'alive' then maybe we could identify ourselves with it. If a 'image' was alive so that it unpredetermined evolved it's own image to reflect the meaning of it's surroundings and other things that have this 'mystical property' then we might identify ourselves with it.
But 'life' is not to be tampered with, not too much anyway. A image that was essentially alive, has to be met with respect, cause maybe we would have to assume that it was aware of it's surroundings, if it was made by man, then they would have to face this. I cannot imagine the grief such a man would go through (since he would have to rely on the image to know if it was 'ok'), no, life is better left to God. That's why it could become immoral to create robots that essentially reflected human design and behaviour (or to make incomplete such robots, or to make robots knowing they would not be respected as 'one of us'). Remember, this doesn't have to be in the far future. It could happen tomorrow, we don't know when the breakthrough comes.