Poll: Can an android be human?

[teisjm]

As long as they're machines then no, but i wouldn't be suprised if the scientists managed to make artificial biological humans some day.

I guess i would say that if they were able to reproduce with humans then yes, they would be humans.

 

[PatientGrasshopper]

Can artificial intelligence ever be human? And I mean, proper Asimovesque intelligence, not a microwave.

I don't think so, I mean we could make synthetic organs in the future I bet but they could never be truly human. I think we can get them to think like us but it will never truly be human. However, ever heard of Bicentennial Man? It was about an android who essentially became human.
This could open up a whole nother can of worms but it is like the question, can humans become God? I vote no on that one.

 

[joystickjunki3]

Human? No. Sentient? Hell yes.

I think that one day robots/androids/gynoids will be able to act in an individual fashion based on logic that has either evolved or was programmed by us. But will they be human? I don't think so, because we're human (organic) and possibly in the future clones will be human, but androids and the like are mechanical or bio-mechanical.

 

[Ace of Spades]

If they ever make the real version of Harkness, then I will vote yes.

 

[DigitalSushi]

I voted no.
It's a machine, therefore it is not human. simple as that.

yes but only by human language can you actually say that is it not human, what is human exactly?

You can't answer the OP's question because different people and animal's have completly different views as to what human is, take a dog for exactly, well trained under the tutelage of a human... a human tells the dog to sit and the dog sits.

Make a robot that says "sit" and the dog sits, once again to the animal kingdom for all intents and purposes thinks that robot is the alpha male, we merely surplant that dominance on ourselves cos we are big heads innit.

being able to get a dog to sit, does it make it human? because a robot has recreated a human exercise?.

we make houses, beavers create dam's, beavers knew more about the structural intergraty of buildings in rushing water then we knew about at the start of the 19th century, does that make them more human at the time?.

Anyway, what is the definition of "human"?, acting like a prick on an internet forum?. I'd prefer to be a robot.

 

[Dirty Apple]

Can't be human, could reach a level of intellect where it would be unjust not to give it human rights

Hear, Hear, my good man! The OP's original statement is flawed. An artificial intelligence could never be human and vice versa, BUT, I believe technology will reach a level where an artificial intelligence could achieve sentience. At which point, it would be morally reprehensible to not treat it as a peer.

 

[murphy7801]

um you really failed the point hear that humans are biological machines the defination of human has to be defined either in terms of dna or mental state. more worrying soon be able to copy peoples brains into pcs so think more definition humanity is the real question ?

 

[mdk31]

A human, by definition, is an animal of the species homo sapiens. An android would be a machine, no matter how much it looked and acted human. It would not be human.

 

[murphy7801]

go read do androids dream of electric sheep people on this thread it might go colour your perspective

 

[fenrizz]

I voted no.
It's a machine, therefore it is not human. simple as that.

yes but only by human language can you actually say that is it not human, what is human exactly?

You can't answer the OP's question because different people and animal's have completly different views as to what human is, take a dog for exactly, well trained under the tutelage of a human... a human tells the dog to sit and the dog sits.

Make a robot that says "sit" and the dog sits, once again to the animal kingdom for all intents and purposes thinks that robot is the alpha male, we merely surplant that dominance on ourselves cos we are big heads innit.

being able to get a dog to sit, does it make it human? because a robot has recreated a human exercise?.

we make houses, beavers create dam's, beavers knew more about the structural intergraty of buildings in rushing water then we knew about at the start of the 19th century, does that make them more human at the time?.

Anyway, what is the definition of "human"?, acting like a prick on an internet forum?. I'd prefer to be a robot.

Sorry if I have offended you. I certainly did not intend to come off as a prick.

I voted no.
It's a machine, therefore it is not human. simple as that.

*Hands Fenrizz the entire series of Battlestar Galactica* Watch that please, seriously, it will redefine your concepts of what it means to be human and machine. Frakkin' toasters...

Put it this way: aren't humans just organic machines? We function in similar ways, we both need fuel, we both break down, etc. If we were to get over the uncanny valley and create a robot that was impossible to tell apart from humans, while at the same time being able to have complex, emotional thought, how would it be any different then one of us?

you make a good point.
The only thing I can think of, is that humans (in general) are able to reproduce naturally.
I've never seen a show/movie with androids that are capable of human emotion though, so it's kind of foreign to me.
I might just take a look at Battlestar Galactica. I've been meaning too, but alas, I spend too much time doing nothing.

 

[flare09]

That is highly illogical, captain.

 

[Zorg Machine]

an android is MADE by humans. Therefore no.

btw humans are also "made" by humans and so are clones and we consider a cloned cow a cow right?

anyways all human feelings, thoughts and personalities are simple electronic signals and things we have learned (the reason why humans smile to express happiness is because as babies we smile at some point while exercising facial muscles and do it more often when we get extra attention from parents because of it). can computers learn? yes, there are computers that can learn (though they are at a very primitive level) can computers transmit electric signals? yes, thats what they do. computers are essentially a brain. a primitive brain wholly different from human minds but still a brain in many senses.

as long as we manage to give a free will, pain and emotions (all theoretically possible) to androids they would be, in every sense of the word, human.

btw there is already a law in place to protect said androids from slavery.

 

[wordsmith]

I hope not, because if they can be then we're all buggered.

 

[ZeroMachine]

No. It could become as intelligent as a human. Have a personality like one. But if an android was to become a human, it wouldn't be an android... it would be a human. Dur.

 

[GoldenRaz]

They can be humanoid, but not human (as in Homo Sapiens Sapiens).

 

[DigitalSushi]

I voted no.
It's a machine, therefore it is not human. simple as that.

yes but only by human language can you actually say that is it not human, what is human exactly?

You can't answer the OP's question because different people and animal's have completly different views as to what human is, take a dog for exactly, well trained under the tutelage of a human... a human tells the dog to sit and the dog sits.

Make a robot that says "sit" and the dog sits, once again to the animal kingdom for all intents and purposes thinks that robot is the alpha male, we merely surplant that dominance on ourselves cos we are big heads innit.

being able to get a dog to sit, does it make it human? because a robot has recreated a human exercise?.

we make houses, beavers create dam's, beavers knew more about the structural intergraty of buildings in rushing water then we knew about at the start of the 19th century, does that make them more human at the time?.

Anyway, what is the definition of "human"?, acting like a prick on an internet forum?. I'd prefer to be a robot.

Sorry if I have offended you. I certainly did not intend to come off as a prick.

Oh god no, I'm so sorry Fenrizz, I wasn't calling you a prick on forums, that was meant to be a general statement. I only quoted you for the first paragraph!.

I've re read what I've wrote and it does come accross like i'm calling you a prick, man I'm so sorry dude, that wasn't my desired effect, I thought I was been all clever and shit ...

unfortunatly I'm only human.

 

[Redingold]

If it can pass the Turing Test, why not?

I don't mean physically human, rather mentally human.

 

[fenrizz]

I voted no.
It's a machine, therefore it is not human. simple as that.

yes but only by human language can you actually say that is it not human, what is human exactly?

You can't answer the OP's question because different people and animal's have completly different views as to what human is, take a dog for exactly, well trained under the tutelage of a human... a human tells the dog to sit and the dog sits.

Make a robot that says "sit" and the dog sits, once again to the animal kingdom for all intents and purposes thinks that robot is the alpha male, we merely surplant that dominance on ourselves cos we are big heads innit.

being able to get a dog to sit, does it make it human? because a robot has recreated a human exercise?.

we make houses, beavers create dam's, beavers knew more about the structural intergraty of buildings in rushing water then we knew about at the start of the 19th century, does that make them more human at the time?.

Anyway, what is the definition of "human"?, acting like a prick on an internet forum?. I'd prefer to be a robot.

Sorry if I have offended you. I certainly did not intend to come off as a prick.

Oh god no, I'm so sorry Fenrizz, I wasn't calling you a prick on forums, that was meant to be a general statement. I only quoted you for the first paragraph!.

I've re read what I've wrote and it does come accross like i'm calling you a prick, man I'm so sorry dude, that wasn't my desired effect, I thought I was been all clever and shit ...

unfortunatly I'm only human.

phew, that's a relief. I was feeling like a jerk here.
Oh well.
But, I do get your point on the matter.
I haven't really any good arguments at this time to support my views, but I'll see if I can't come up with some.

 

[fulano]

If we look at the human brain as nothing but a computer where certain segments process certain specific tasks then, yeah, it could. That is if we revise what it means to be human.

We could create a software program to process information like we do(via a very advanced neural network) once we figure out how the brain works. If we do that, and it works, who the hell are you to tell that that thing is not a person? Who gave you that power to deliver over what is and isn't after being confronted with evidence?

I just know that the day we do it, and yes we will, there'll be a shit storm.

 

[Noone From Nowhere]

If the definition of Android is any synthetic humanoid, then the answer is yes, granted that the android is a 'simple' carbon copy of a human. If it is a mechanical android, then the answer is no, it can not be human any more than a stack of compact discs can be a cheese burger.
Why would anyone want androids to be exactly like humans when they wouldn't be subject to the same natural laws and environmental pressures that produced Humanity, anyway?