Are Robots Dehumanizing Human Life?

When the human/robot interface fades away, it will be too late.

It seems that this topic keeps being brought up here ad nauseum.

As long as there are humans, we will be human.

If history's taught us anything, it's that given enough time humans like to change things to suit themselves and that they can adapt to anything.

I mean think about it: how should one even conceive "being human" over something devised and constructed by humans. Does 'being human' mean being a man or woman in his natural state, i.e., running around naked on the savannah? Or does it mean that everything done ought to be done by a human who's physically present (e.g., sitting in the cab of an excavator) or by a human who's actually doing the work (e.g., someone digging witha a shovel)?

The question boils down to does someone always have to be wherever somnething's done. The obvious answer is no: having a single operator operate millions of dollars of production machinery is better than having a host of operators running around opening and shutting valves, measuring levels with dipsticks, shoveling coal into a boiler. The same thing applies to sending robot probes to study the moons of Jupiter: even if we could get people out there and ensure their safe return, would we WANT to if robot probes can do all the work?

As far as I'm concerned, I'm all too ready to cut back on the experience of digging holes with a shovel in favour of exploring Jupiter's moons (or in my case do consulting work in energy efficiency). :P

Cheers! DZ

'Me thinks' Man is dehumanizing Human Life..Will the Robots show up for work [sober] on time and get the job done..that is not dehumanizing..can we program them to take care of the tools, not steal the product, or the equipment..'Gosh', that would sure beat what is showing up on my doorstep..

In the beginning, man struggled to acquire his basic needs, food, shelter and protection from external threat. It is the same today. Over the many thousands of years we have learned to do these things more efficiently to the point that we can do a very effective job of food production, providing shelter and destroying our enemies both real and imagined. This trend seems likely to continue.

tommm

"Are we removing too much of the uncertainty in our lives?"

No, but we are minimizing hazards. If it's uncertainty you're after, try dating.

I'll tell you the answer if you can adequately define "Dehumanizing"

Here's some data from the world of "paranormal" research:

The first "life forms" WERE robot-like mechanisms. They were run, as life forms are today, by living entities that we humans call "spirits."

By developing robots we are, essentially, recovering an ancient technology that has been lost to us for a long time. By this theory, however, what we call the "human body" is really just an advanced biological robot, invented by beings similar to ourselves a very long time ago.

How "dehumanized" life gets depends largely on ourselves and our understandings about life. Life can get very anti-human, you might say, without any machines in sight. It depends mostly on what values we are willing to stand up for.

agreed.

So does this mean we can equate 'operating systems' of robots with 'souls' of us critters?