Can Machine Have a Conscience - Essay Example

Yang Yang ENGL-1213-01 Gantz 10 Oct Can Machine have a Conscience? Today’s world is filled with science and technology. Each and every daypeople see and hear news about breakthroughs in the world of IT, robotics and nanotechnology. Integrating this with science-fiction, people pose a serious question as to whether machines can ever have a conscience; this is basically whether computers can discern between right or wrong like humans. Most philosophers argue nearly all human actions arise from motive, desire or impulse (Danielson 540). From this, one can see that if one the right or the good behavior, it is due to the fact they desire to do them. Maybe the urge is, at times, nothing more than the pressures or influences of past parental or societal training or perhaps it may arise from some form of social instinct buried deep in humans or from the understanding it is in the longstanding concern of the agent. However, in any case, it should be noted humans do act autonomously of some form of desire unlike a machine, which is guided by humans (Pitrat 41). No matter how intelligent machines are, they cannot have human’s thoughts and lifestyles. In the last ten years, AI has really progressed due to an increase in research collaboration that has resulted in inventing computers with high processing speed. A lot of researchers propose that within the current century, the AI will cross that of human beings. Furthermore, individuals such as Hall have great expectation (Tucker and Patrick 54). Some scientists believe robots will carry out more difficult work instead of human’s work in the future. In some specific situations, robots could judge and perform tasks individually out of people’s control. All in all, some scientists predict that robots will become more intelligent to help people. Start by defining what a conscience is and people find it is an inner or deep sense of what wrong or right in one’s behavior, motives or conduct, impelling someone towards the right action. A conscience can also be defined as the ethical, as well as moral principles, which guide or inhibits someone’s thoughts or actions, and which can be argued to be an inhibiting sense of what is prudent (Allen and Wallach 55). Someday digital computers will be intelligent but not conscious. The likeliness of digital computers has been infatuated since Alan Turning formerly brought it up in 1950 (55). They are unclear about conscience, which they thought unnecessary to machine intelligence, but many others have also been unclear since. However, artificial consciousness is, for sure, as interesting artificial intelligence. Pereira and Saptauijiaya argue computers will never be self-aware, due to the simple fact that are created from the wrong stuff (12). Scientists assert consciousness arises from the physical and chemical structure of humankind and animals. Therefore, it is right to argue animals have some consciousness and intelligence to the point they seem human-like. However, machines cannot be programmed to convert carbon dioxide into sugar or an even simply breath; machines are produced from unhuman-like materials and, therefore, lack the traits to be self-aware. Supposed one asks a man and a computer to envision a flower and explain it. One may get the same explanations and be unable to tell apart from the two, but behind the parallel explanations are crucial distinctions. The man can sense and also see an imaginary rose, but the computer cannot, in reality, sense or see anything, despite the good performance it can put. A computer lacks an internal mental world, meaning it lacks a conscience as it is blank (Danielson 540). Research conducted at the University of Wisconsin-Madison by Giulio Tononi discovered computers lack the ability to reason like humans because they cannot integrate lots of pieces of information and experience them the information like humans (Pitrat 56). Professor’s argument was consciousness is purely rooted in the integration of many pieces of information and computers do not have the ability to work the pieces as a whole; they have to break them down into smaller bits. The institution utilized a mathematical framework to come up with its findings (Pitrat 56). For instance, when humans look at a blue triangle, their brains are not able to register the shapes as a colorless triangle and in addition, a shapeless colored area, meaning that humans only understand the wider picture, which is needed to be considered conscious. Phil Maguire, a professor, from the National University of Ireland, argued XOR Logic Gate, an AR computational device, depends on utilizing a combination of two inputs that need a loss of information (56). This means when two bits are inserted in, one has to be taken out. If the human brain would be functioning like this, then it would have to be always hemorrhaging information. Maguire’s team defined integration concerning how it is challenging to modify information. It is simple for machines to edit many images, but memories are made up of intertwined experiences and images, and they can never be altered in the way AR machines alter their information or memory. Therefore, consciousness can never be developed on a physical machine in finite time through limited memory because the process is overly complex and beyond humans’ capabilities to reverse and put it to use in AR machines (56). It is people’s consciences that tell them the difference between a right and a wrong. Therefore, people are aware of what to do, but machines lack awareness of what is it they are doing. A machine can basically be termed as a slave since it only follows its master’s orders devoid of any question (Pereira and Saptuijiwa 15). Humans can think or reason for themselves plus can believe in what they think, but machines are not even aware of what they carry or the information they hold. Humans get awareness of something through the five senses, smell, sight, taste, sound and touch. Even though, machines have the ability to sense these too, they do it in an abstract manner. However, in humans, these senses are more than an electrical impulse sent through nerves plus they cannot be attained in AR machines which work only through electrical impulses. Thus, a machine cannot feel what humans really feel (15). Maybe what one can take as a positive is that the IT and AR world are fast advancing, and maybe, as time goes by, one might have machines that actually feel emotions like humans, and achieve that high level of consciousness man has been debated. Machines can comply with the laws and demands of morality but cannot have conscious. For instance, if the machines are to be used in the military field, they can only fire when authorized by humans. Similar to humans, they often need the contact of military leadership so as to be authorized or made to react. But they cannot be given more authority than that since they do not know what is morally right or wrong in aspect to human perception (Gupta 32). In other words, the machines level of consciousness cannot equate that of human beings even under orders. For example, a deployment of autonomous robots can only be used in handling of simple issues (Chih-Wei et al. 13). Since the robots do not have conscience, they cannot handle technical situations that need reasoning and argument. Robots like the autonomous ones can, therefore, be used only to handle relatively less complex situation like the reconnaissance. The mistakes that humans make in their daily life are components of their consciousness. Even if machines are built closer to perfection and work under order they lack the aspect of consciousness. For instance, robots can tolerate more harm than humans and might not respond to aggression (Gupta 32). Even though these qualities make them outstanding in defending or patrolling, their lack of conscience makes it impossible to interact effectively with human beings in their duties. They can, therefore, be only good in the defending or patrolling areas with human off- limit zones. Robots are never racist, angry, rude, or politically- minded since they lack conscience (Gupta 32). Since conscience is the moral sense of wrong or right as per human behavior, robots, therefore, lack it. Their systems are controlled in a way that they are not allowed to judge consciously what is morally upright or not. It is therefore true that the humans might be controlling the robots on the background are conscience. However, they cannot transfer the consciousness to the robots. However, in situations that the rules governing the robots are sophisticated enough, they might be more moral compared to humans. Nevertheless, the aspect that makes them close to perfection is what makes them unconscious. For example, a robot might be made to be either too moral, or less moral compared to humans hence lack the aspect of judging what is right or wrong. Robots have greatly advanced over years; however, they are still nothing but tools. For instance, robotics has ensured the creation of machines with several articulation points. The multiple articulation points have made them have an array of sensors that can enable them to become sensitive to the environmental changes. Other robots have the capacity to run, teach, and climb the stairs (Chih-Wei et al. 13). Even though robots can be useful in our daily activities, they are unaware of their existence since they are unconscious. That is, they can only perform tasks that they are programmed. They cannot think for themselves and, therefore, falls under the control of humans. Human consciousness cannot be transferred to the robots in todays world. That is, human consciousness is complex and not yet exhausted by scientists to allow for the transfer process to be possible (Biswal et al. 4734). Even though computer scientists and programmers have developed methods to simulate superficial thinking, cracking the consciousness code so as to give life to a machine is beyond their grasp yet. Conscience entails is not only about vivid sensations but also include the capability to dream, have emotions, visual imagery, and inner speech that the robots lack. It lies in the brain even though the mechanisms that provide it might be hard to understand. Robots are unconscious since it is impossible to develop programs that mimic thoughts. The programs would give the robots the capability to respond and recognize patterns (Biswal et al. 4734). However, that would not make it aware of itself since it will still be responding to commands. Even though an attempt has been made through computer scientists and neurologists coming together to formulate an artificial brain model, it will not make the robots conscious. First, even the scientists have not yet fully understood the functioning of the brain. Second, it, therefore, means building the artificial brain will not play the full role of the natural one hence cannot create actual conscience. Robots have no conscience since there do not exist even one with artificially created conscious (Carl 69). Even though artificially created conscious will not equate it to human definition of conscience, it will bring it closer. Such an attempt has been impacted with the fear of the repercussion that robots could cause to the society. The scientific fear, therefore, shows that they are certain that the levels of human conscience cannot be achieved by robots. The lingering questions among the scientists, is how the robots would react if they have feelings? Would they object to being used as tools? Is it ethically right to conduct such an exploration? Conscience is equated to human beings, a criterion that the robots could not meet despite the advancement. For example, it would be hard to define the level at which the robots would be bestowed their legal rights based on their consciousness and intelligence because it does exist. They will, therefore, remain to be tools to be used by humans since they lack the conscience. Robots are never emotional and will never be since the characteristic is based on brain functionality that has proven impossible to emulate. In explanation, robots are made of computer programs and hence cannot handle any process that comprehensively and completely integrates information. Since computers cannot handle processes that completely integrate data, robots cannot have the capability to feel neither can they be conscious. Data integration is a basic element of consciousness. The capability of the brain to contextualize information makes it able to integrate and contextualize complex data. For example, the brain registers a red triangle in its holistic form and not as a shapeless color area and colorless triangle. The brain, therefore, enables humans to understand the wider picture, a concept that robots lack. On the contrary, robots cannot handle such complex processes that entail meshing the pieces of data seamlessly since they rely on computer programs. Since consciousness is based on an integration of bulky information, robots are not capable of experiencing emotions similar to those of humans hence unconscious. In other words, it is impossible to create consciousness in a robot in a particular time given it has a limited memory. However, it does not mean that the brain functions in a magic format but its processes are too complicated to be explained (Biswal et al. 4734). In explanation, it is complex to the extent that humans do not have the ability to decompose and reverse it. According to Robert et al. (20400), robots external features can be designed into a model close to human but not the internal features that will cause consciousness like the brain. That is, there is a possibility of creating a robot that can move softly. However, it will still not have conscious since the brain is what determines consciousness and that is what they lack. The unique class of locomotive robot, however, can be flexible like human beings. In the study, the soft locomotive robot has is composed exclusively of flexible materials known as the elastomeric polymers. The idea of the use of the elastomeric polymers was inspired by the flexibility of animals like the worms, starfish, and squid that lack the hard internal skeletons. The idea of soft lithography can, therefore, be used to create a robot of sophisticated locomotion that might be better even than the humans in flexibility. But this will not give it consciousness. Even though the idea of soft robotics entails zero use of sensors to move, the robot is still controlled to some extent. For soft locomotion, the robot uses a system made of pneumatic valves that respond to pressure. However, the sensor of the robot still relies on the human beings that are controlling it. It is the scientists that will decide that when it should either combine undulation gaits and crawling to escape danger or to reach a target. Robots can be designed to imitate most of the human qualities but not consciousness. For example, social robotics has the capability of designing robots that can socially interact with human beings and other robots (Alač, Movellan & Tanaka 893). However, the capability to interact with human beings does not make the robots conscious since consciousness is more than socialization. The social robots in this case still lack the capability of being awake and aware of their surroundings. Even though they might be able to sense the extreme situations like fire or flood, they cannot sense the minor changes in the environment in the environment as the weather. For example, the social robots will still lack the capacity to know that it is hot and one need to remove his or her clothes. Furthermore, it will still lack the capacity to love, a concept that is associated with consciousness. In addition, even the social robots will not be in the position to determine when one is angry or bored of their presence. The research conducted in human- robot interaction agrees that the robots cannot have the exact characteristics of humans. They can only be designed to imitate the human etiquette but will never be the same. But it is humanity that defines consciousness, and that is what the robots lack. The fact that robots cannot be conscious can be understood through understanding the conscience concept itself. Conscience entails one becoming aware of his or her existence, something that robots do not have (Schwartzman 317). It also entails the collective feelings and thoughts of a particular individual or group of people. In this case, human beings are the ones with consciousness. The threshold that humans use to measure consciousness cannot and will never be met with robots (Fredriksson 119). Furthermore, consciousness entails the use of senses and mind. Even though a robot might have a sense, it will never have a mind of its own thus making it unconscious. In addition, consciousness is defined by the ability to have acute awareness, interest, or concern over the surrounding. It, therefore, means as long as the robots are serving the interest and concerns of human beings, they are not conscious. In conclusion, even though in today’s life robots are not conscience, futuristic scientists predict a time that they will be in an artificial sense. Movies such as “The Matrix” and “Terminator” are apocalyptic science tales that are filled with imagination and dreams of what the future would be in case the impossible happens. However, this is different with the case of "RoboCop" in which the brain is of the human. In the movie one can argue that the RoboCop is not a robot since it uses a human brain in which memories have been erased. That explains why it has the capability to have feelings like other humans. On the other hand, "The Matrix" and "Terminator" movies are based on self- recursive improvement theory. Self-recursive improvement is a theoretical ability of a robot to examine, analyze, and improve itself. It is a visionary theory that forecasts an era in which the machines can improve their versions and tweak or build new ones. The theory argues that through the process, the robots of each generation would be better than the previous ones (Carl 69). Such an evolution will ensure that technology changes at a blistering pace to the better hence the redefinition of reality. It will be redefined because it will not resemble the present at that time. But in these scenarios, even though they can control themselves, their consciousness is still in limbo. In explanation, they will be having an artificial consciousness different with that of humans. And as per the prediction of the videos, the threat is that they might be attempted to do away with human nature since they lack conscious. At best scenarios, they will ignore humans and become independent, and at worst they wipe humans from the surface of the earth. Works Cited Alač, Morana, Javier Movellan, and Fumihide Tanaka. “When a Robot Is Social: Spatial Arrangements and Multimodal Semiotic Engagement in the Practice of Social Robotics”. Social Studies of Science 41.6 (2011): 893–926. Print. Allen, Colin, and Wendell Wallach. "Moral Machines: Contradiction in Terms or Abdication of Human Responsibility."Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robotics 54.33: (2011): 55-68. Print. Biswal, Bharat B. et al.. “Toward Discovery Science of Human Brain Function”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107.10 (2010): 4734–4739. Print. Carl, Gutiérrez-Jones. “Stealing Kinship: neuromancer and Artificial Intelligence”. Science Fiction Studies 41.1 (2014): 69–92. Print. Chih-Wei, Chang et al.. “Exploring the Possibility of Using Humanoid Robots as Instructional Tools for Teaching a Second Language in Primary School”. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 13.2 (2010): 13–24. Print. Danielson, Peter. "Can Robots Have a Conscience?"Nature 457.7229 (2009): 540. Print. Fredriksson, Ingrid. The Mysteries of Consciousness: Essays on Spacetime, Evolution and Well- Being. , 2015. Print. Gupta, Satyandra. “We, Robot: What Real-life Machines Can and Cant Do”. Science News 178.8 (2010): 32–32. Print. Pereira, Luís Moniz, and Ari Saptawijaya. "Bridging Two Realms of Machine Ethics."Rethinking Machine Ethics in the Age of Ubiquitous Technology. IGI Global;(2015). Print. Pitrat, Jacques. Artificial Beings: the Conscience of a Conscious Machine. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2013. Print. Schwartzman, Micah. “Conscience, Speech, and Money”. Virginia Law Review 97.2 (2011): 317–384. Print. Shepherd, Robert F. et al.. “Multigait Soft Robot”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 108.51 (2011): 20400–20403. Print. Tucker, Patrick. "The Artificial Mind And The Posthuman Future."Futurist 41.5 (2007): 54-55. Academic Search Complete. Web. 23 Oct. 2015. Read More