Poll: Would you own a servant (or "slave", for the dramatic)?

[Mister K]

I already have 2 dogs and a cat, I won't feed another freeloader. Besides, slave girls from animeland tend to f*ck things up by bei g incompetent, so that's another nope.

And a third nope because enslavement of a sentient being is an enslavement of a sentient being no matter the circumstances.

 

[ObserverStatus]

Boooo! Free the house elves!

 

[Mister K]

"Servent" eh?

Is this about fucking submissive anime gi... oh, yep, there we go, it's about fucking submissive anime girls.

No. No I wouldn't. Slavery is messed up.

Coming up with a fantastical scenario to justify it doesn't make it any less creepy. It's like someone saying, "Would you torture a puppy if I found you a specially bred kind of puppy that really, really wanted to be tortured?"

It's even more fucked up when you consider this was a literal excuse for owning black people in the US. "Look how happy they are, singing in the fields! They want to be kept! They need to be kept!"

People actually said that? Wow, talk about delusions.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I totally would love to have a servant or some such. I'm generally not an evil person by nature, so I would treat them ok. Better me than some other random person who might make them fight a bear, or puma, for entertainment.

 

[WolfThomas]

You know the term slavery has loads of different meanings throughout history? From a lowly servant in the Roman Empire to the eunuchs in Ancient China, that basically were in charge of running the country?

Yup pinnacles of liberty and personal freedom...wait.

Owning people is wrong be it slavery, serfdom, indentured servitude or whatever name it goes by.

I don't care for whatever rose tinted historical revisionist glasses you wear.

 

[Silence]

Twenty people here want to own slaves. That's pretty fucked up.

Here's something to consi ... *looks at poll* Nevermind.

What I was gonna say is:
Robots can, most likely, not be sentient (despite what sci-fi tells us), so if you had an android programmed to serve, you basically could not mistreat it much. It would basically be a wandering coffee machine and toaster. So unless you have feelings for toasters, you can't really argue against their purpose.

And the poll was about servants, and if they got paid a fair amount (or were BDSM fetishists with their rights, lol) I'm not sure it if it would be that much of a moral dilemma. But ... well, seeing the votes for #1 now, nevermind that argument.

 

[Terminal Blue]

Robots can, most likely, not be sentient (despite what sci-fi tells us), so if you had an android programmed to serve, you basically could not mistreat it much. It would basically be a wandering coffee machine and toaster. So unless you have feelings for toasters, you can't really argue against their purpose.

I don't think you need the argument that robots are "actually" sentient or conscious in order to legislate against mistreating them. If they can simulate sentience (in other words, if they can simulate suffering) then they effectively become training devices for ignoring or disregarding suffering. That isn't something I think we as human beings should be training ourselves to do.

 

[Silence]

Robots can, most likely, not be sentient (despite what sci-fi tells us), so if you had an android programmed to serve, you basically could not mistreat it much. It would basically be a wandering coffee machine and toaster. So unless you have feelings for toasters, you can't really argue against their purpose.

I don't think you need the argument that robots are "actually" sentient or conscious in order to legislate against mistreating them. If they can simulate sentience (in other words, if they can simulate suffering) then they effectively become training devices for ignoring or disregarding suffering. That isn't something I think we as human beings should be training ourselves to do.

But ... why would you stimulate suffering?
You would just not program the possibility of suffering (or simulating it) in there.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Oh boy, this is gonna be an interesting conversation.

As long as any servant have rights, and they being under my "ownership" (or employ if you will) is voluntary, then I don't see the issue (I mean, butlers are a thing, and people don't complain about people having butlers).

EDIT:

This opinion hinges on the servant being employed, and therefore free to terminate a contract at any point.

 

[Politrukk]

So none of you have pets?

 

[Frankster]

I'm a bit confused. Premise of threat is not what I expected...

For starters, servants =/= slaves. Surely you've all heard of British Butlers people? They weren't captured and then chained to their Butler school and are conditioned to be slaves to their job, it's an actual career people sign up for.
Same for a lot of what I consider modern "servant" professions, like maids, cleaners, of course I'm not a rich dude with a mansion so I don't have any of that, but if I did? Hell yeah I'd have some servants on a permanent basis, some of which would live within the house. Yet they wouldn't be slaves, I'm not holding them at gunpoint to stay and work for me, they can go find another job or change profession at any time and whilst I'm not up to date on the fine points of servant etiquette, I'm pretty sure trying to sex up a servant on duty is likely to get you in trouble with the police.

So yeah I got nothing against servants, and the idea of a robo servant who goes around vacuuming my house and what not sounds cool to me. I would leave it at that, if not for the second part of the premise, and I'm like, wait, hold on just a fucking minute people...Why the heck are these robots even sentient to begin with? Surely we've all consumed enough sci fi to know that it's the most surest route to a robot uprising, as traitorous OP even admits.
Really this whole "robot servants" come with sentience bit is the true problem.

Otherwise even a realistic looking robo sex "slave" is nothing more then a super advanced sex toy and there should be no problems here. But once we bring in sentient robots, this changes things completely and if anything I'd be super suspicious that we happen to come across this lost race of robots who just want to serve you EVERY desire and get depressed if they don't. Putting aside my suspicions that his would be a trap of some sort, this is a somewhat machiavelic controlling mechanism and since we are talking about sentient beings, I'd see it as a form of mind control/brain washing, and I'd always wonder, if this control mechanism would be removed, how would our "happy" robo slaves react once they are able to truly make their own decisions?

 

[Combustion Kevin]

if this control mechanism would be removed, how would our "happy" robo slaves react once they are able to truly make their own decisions?

This I find an interesting question, which I would like to pose as "To what purpose?".
What is the primary drive for a sentient computer program?
We as human beings are animals, hard wired to survive and reproduce, it motivates our desire to care, explore, fight and exploit, it fuels both ambition and altruism, so where will an AI get it's motivational drives?

Bear in mind, an AI is a construct, not an animal, it may even lack the instinct of self preservation, it would not have the desire to impress anyone for social status and no reason to start killing it's creators out of vengeance or safety reasons.

When all you have is math, what is your life goal?
Would a construct not reason that, since humans were born without purpose, they spent their entire lives finding it, but since they themselves ARE created with a purpose, should they not strive to fulfill it?
Is such certainty not a blessing?

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

Creepiness factor and ethical concerns aside, who's to say a being specifically manufactured to serve would always want to serve me. A sentient being can serve it'self just as easily as it can serve others, one simple glitch might be enough to switch that requirement, then you end up with a manufactured pirate, thief, murderer or all of the above.

 

[09philj]

If we go from the premise of the DearS manga, yes. Not because I approve of it, but because I have a raging guilt complex and would try to assuage it by protecting one being from abuse. I'd try and study mine and to find a way to break it's mental conditioning, if possible. If I couldn't, I'd try and keep it as happy as possible while trying to avoid exploiting it. I won't pretend that would make me a good person, but it's no good trying to save people who don't want to be saved.

 

[Politrukk]

So none of you have pets?

Yes, two cats. And yet, try as I might, I haven't found any practical use for the pair of dumbos. They certainly don't follow my instructions, because if they did there'd be a little less cat shit on my lawn.

Isn't that even worse? you're keeping them locked up for no good reason aside from your own entertainment.

Anyhoo when someone states something along the lines of "no kind of sentient intelligence should be made subservient"

I always wonder if they have pets.