Lit Humans v. Droids: What's the difference?

This is continuing the discussion originally started by me, @Tython Awakening , and @DarthPhilosopher .

What's the difference between a sentient creature and a droid? What counts as a sole? Does reproduction have something to do with it? Who knows!?

In my opinion, the line between human and machine is razor thin. We're fast reaching the point where Artificial Intelligence is indistinguishable from actual people. And when that point happens, we'd be hard pressed to find any significant difference between the two from interaction alone. That point has already been reached in Star Wars. We see droids develop over time, gain unique points of view, and form relationships. To me, they seem no different than the organics from a character point of view.

What do you guys think?

 

These.

Things.

Do.

Not.

Matter.

What do any of these have to do with whether a droid is sentient or not?

 

Soul.

 

If I talk to someone with a soul and someone without a soul, what is the quantifiable difference?

 

Moved from another thread:

Because you don't need to intent to program these things for them to occur. They can result from the AI's experience. The fact that we can't define these things is the point because we can't know when an AI develops them exactly.

 

A reply to where I moved the thread before I realised Outsourced made his

I actually don't have a strong opinion about droids in SW. There are convincing arguments either way.

 

A shoe has a sole. A human being has a soul.

All human beings have souls. You cannot talk to someone without a soul. This is because all human beings have a soul. Remember, shoes have soles. Human beings have souls.

I do not recommend repeating this question. It will be disturbing and confusing to someone. Especially a child. Get it? Good.

But we do. We control the AI's experiences. We therefore control what goes into an AI's memory storage. There is always input and output.

This statement above is false. The point has not been reached in Star Wars.

All of those things matter: Children have parents. Robots have Makers.

 

It's largely unexplored territory so far. But I think the droids demonstrate lot of emotion, especially in their sound design. They're not just alternating possibly appropriate responses, a la Siri. Also, I think L3's 'memory' getting transferred into a ship, which has no obvious parallel to L3's body, says something about the possible continuity of mind.

 

So basically a mechanical brain.

It's not relevant how a droid is created. We are talking about their experience.

A droid being property does not mean that they necessarily don't have emotions, gender or consciousness.

I'm fairly sure that they can.

Not sure how these are relevant?

There can be discrimination.

See I'm not sure why you're so absolute upon this. Many neuroscientists have describe how brain functions as similar to a machine, with rathe predicable outcomes if it could be properly mapped. This is a fundamental element of the materialist free will debate. The key difference is that, in the real world, we currently can't create something as complex as the human brain. Clearly droids in SW are more advanced. Their 'brains' would be very mechanically complex, and their functions may be similar to that of a brain. The question then becomes at what point does a mechanical and organic brain become essentially identical in function.

Have you seen films like Blade Runner where stuff like this is discussed? It's a complex issue about whether there is something non-material about human beings that gives us consciousness, or whether what we call consciousness is a result of our physical make-up.

It could be argued that our 'genders' are a result of our 'programming' created by our society and experience

 

Droids are non-sentient except for if you leave them on too long.

 

This is some condescending bull****. And all because I misspelled soul as sole once.

 

I am troubled by the tone of this question. You need C-3PO and R2D2 to visit your school and explain the difference between a human being and a droid.

 

What is a soul @Tython Awakening?

 

There isn't a difference! Not when it comes to how you interact with them. That's my whole point. Yeah, I get that they're machines. But we're biological machines. So what's the difference really when you get down to it?

And please god do not bring up reproduction and physically growing. That has nothing to do with the actual sentience of an AI.

 

If droids have conscious experience, then there is little difference between them and us except biological functions, which could be argued to be superficial. Or perhaps they are just machines. The last time I asked a toaster how it felt I didn't get a reply. But that may not hold true within the Star Wars galaxy.

 

Even the power generators are droids with some degree of intelligence. Why not toasters?

 

There is a difference. Robots use hardware and software to accomplish what they do. There will always be hardware. There will always be software to tell the hardware what to do. A robot will always have input and output.

The Maker chooses the hardware and software. The gender of the robot is selected and programmed by the Maker.

An organic being is procreated. DNA is combined from parents. One of the parents gives birth. The female gives birth or the male gives birth in some organics. The child grows into adulthood. Biological beings have complexities that go far beyond that which a Maker gives to a robot.

Reproduction and physical growing into adulthood are an essential part of this discussion. On the droid side, chain of ownership is an essential part of this discussion. Some droids have been dismantled when chain of ownership gets lost. Other droids may carry valuable data which imperial authorities seek right at this very moment.

I am disturbed by these questions as well. A toaster has a single function. When you give a toaster toast, it burns the toast. Then you are forced to eat the burned toast.

 

And we don't have hardware and software? The brain is just a complex computer using synaptic pathways to run familiar series of responses to familiar stimuli. Our bones are like steel pipes supporting our sensors. Our heart is a generator powering us, with our stomach providing the fuel necessary for it to run. We as people are nothing but input and output. That's what we're built on. Dialogue is just one long series of inputting a sentence and outputting a response after running it through a language parser and using it to search a database. It's all the same stuff. But you're too focused on the cogs to see the whole machine.

Now stop just parroting the wikipedia definitions for 'robot' and 'human', and start coming up with some actual arguments. We all know what these things are. What we've yet to ascertain is whether you actually have a point, or if you're just leading us in circles.

 

But what is your point? You are the one on the attack. Who is we? I have already stated all my points. Your points concern trying to quantify human souls and talking to toasters to see if they are intelligent.

Our bodies are composed of organic matter. We do not have have hardware. We do not have software. What part is analogous to software? Is DNA analogous to software?

We have parents. Our parents have gender. Our parents procreated us. We were not built by a Maker. C-3PO needs to visit your classroom.

One of you is trying to quantify souls. One of you wants to define what a soul is. Your problem is trying to define a soul in human terms.

 

Yes.

We.

Do.

You just have such a narrowly defined set of criteria for what makes up these things. Besides literally quoting basic facts, you have no argument. I'm trying to show how talking to a sufficiently advanced machine and talking to a person are no different, because, when you break down the components of a human and those of an advanced machine, the actual processes are ridiculously similar. But you've decided that none of that matters because machine metal human organic parent procreation hur dur dur.

Hell, you don't even have to reply to this post. Your comments are so rote and predictable, I can probably write one up myself.

 

So every scientist and philosopher who has written thesis and research papers upon this subject are just fools Tython?

 

But they are different. Humans procreate. Machines do not. I have a mother and father, whose genes were used to create me. But every machine has a Maker. The two are completely different. And I have gender. So did my parents. Robots are programmed, and built by a Maker, who assigns their gender via programming. Do you need a toaster to come teach you this?

How was that @Tython Awakening? Did I get the inflection right? It's basically nonsensical, but I think it adds to the effect.

 

These statements here are true: Every machine has a Maker. Every human being has parents. No toaster is necessary.

These statements are not nonsensical. I am concerned that you find them nonsensical.

Where did I say they are fools? I never said that.

 

All I can say is, yes AI follows programming, but so we do, at least to a certain extent. And I'm not even convinced we have souls, whatever that is...

 

What types of Operating Systems and software are there for human beings? Does DNA give instructions to the body? It does. But not like an operating system or software.

The DNA comes from the parents. An operating system and software are designed by a Maker. See the difference?