 Bertrand Russell Quotes 366 |
But, if A said to B, “You ought to substitute robots for human beings, because robots do not sin”, almost everybody would reply that the robot world, since it would be destitute of sentience, would be neither good nor bad, and would be in no way better than a world of ordinary matter unable to perform the robots’ imitative tricks. Such considerations make it plain that whatever “ought” may mean, it has something to do with sentience and with desire. Were these are absent, there is neither good nor bad, neither virtue nor sin. It follows that, if our definition of "ought" is not to be arbitrary and paradoxical, it must bear some relation to sentience and desire.
Source: Bertrand Russell: Human Society in Ethics and Politics, (1954), chapter 10：Is there ethical knowledge ?
More info.: https://russell-j.com/cool/47T-1006.htm
* a brief comment:
I tried translating the sentence with ChatGPT, and it translated "since it would be destitute of sentience" as "So the robot world doesn't have sensation...". This is a mistranslation. I pointed out to ChatGPT that robots can be given sensation, and that translating "sentience" as "sensation" is incorrect. It should be translated as "sentience (the ability to feel or perceive things)". ChatGPT agreed with me.
For those who say that robots can also be given sentience, would they be satisfied with the translation "a world without consciousness (self-awareness)"? Are there people who would argue that "robots can also be given consciousness!?" Can we imagine a robot that can reflect on its actions and commit suicide?