robots as a species

[Xittenn]

What would be wrong with citizenship, are we too good for robots? I wasn't just responding to your comments but other comments made! I don't see that being none sexual would mean that they are any less likely to congregate. I don't believe we can even make assumptions on how they might procreate or do anything really. If we don't even understand why we procreate sexually, and from our biological stand point, how can we make consolidated assumptions about a species that doesn't even exist.

 

Furthermore we don't even know that they won't manifest as parasitic little buggers that take the world by storm. It's not like there isn't plenty of silicone to go around. In another thread I had suggested that we may even be the precursor, where although this form of life will not manifest directly on its own, we are in fact like the larval prestage bound by some logical consequence to becoming an amorphic inorganic life form. I see some adaptive advantages to being a little less squishy. People associate robots with metal and cold, not to mention heartless. I see the possibility for something very interesting arising from such a new species, and we might even consider making the move ourselves!

[A Curious Kid]

I was thinking that what we consider to be alive has to have intellectual movements, and that we humans are at the top of this pyramid, but if by this definition of being alive wouldn't an intellectual robot be consider alive as well and if we are able to make a robot smart enough to replicate then wouldn't they be considered a species? if this is true then wouldn't sending robots out into space to repopulate another world be considered as the only way for intellectual species of this world to survive after the sun destroys everything?

 

Right now, after I read your paragraph, I'm thinking that for something to be alive it would need to have emotion and some sense of moral responsibility. It would have to be something more than just processing what they see, hear and touch. I'm pretty sure that everyone will have different opinions about this.

Edited April 10, 2012 by A Curious Kid

[questionposter]

Robots don't apparently fit under the definition of life because they don't evolve on their own, they don't grow, they don't necessarily respond to stimuli, but I think after a certain point a robotic group could be advanced and complex enough to meet these criteria.

Edited April 18, 2012 by questionposter