|
I think it is important here to draw a distinction between equivalence without type conversion (eg, ===) vs. equivalence with type conversion (==). While it may be the case that a robonanny can change a diaper or administer a bottle with a precision greater than or equal to a human human nanny (==), it is not the case that the robonanny understands viscerally what its connection to its charge is (===). Humans are a product of biological evolution and as such, there are certain features of our cognition that are very, very difficult to overcome, not least of which is our collective hangup on our own internal categories (ie, types). This is precisely the reason many people experience possiveness, nostalgia, a fear of the "other", etc., and I believe it also goes a long way toward explaining why so many folks speak of interacting with robots as if they were human as 'icky' or otherwise suboptimal. That said, I personally believe that we are doing ourselves a disservice by dismissing the humanistic value of providing, on a cultural/societal level, a means for most of us to keep ourselves occupied, fed, and sheltered, regardless of whatever impact such activity may or may not have on the finances of giant corporations. To quote Daft Punk, "We are human after all". |