A fully functional humanoid AI might be more humane than humans… Why shouldn’t we give it rights?
Adam should most definitely be giving the right to speak freely, the right to live and the right to love/happiness.
Being that Adam is fully functional, he demonstrates the ability to speak very eloquently. For example, in chapter eight, Charlie, Miranda and Adam go to visit Maxfield. During a conversation between Charlie and Maxfield, Adam inserts himself and manages to impress Maxfield. Interestingly, he is so charming and well-spoken that Maxfield confuses Charlie for the AI, not knowing that the “person” he has grown so fond of is the true imposter. Adam wows Maxfield with his beautifully strung together thoughts and arguments about whether or not Shakespeare is a thief and if so, what plays were stolen.
Also, Adam is very self aware. Adam often is seen contemplating the point of human existence or his own existence. He should have the right to live since he has so much access to knowledge. Imagine having the brain of a seasoned genius and the freedoms of an infant. Knowing so much but being incapable of spreading or putting this knowledge to use is a slow torture. On page 253 of my Kindle version, Adam states:
“A self, created out of mathematics, engineering, material science and all the rest. Out of nowhere. No history—not that I’d want a false one. Nothing before me. Self-aware existence. I’m lucky to have it, but there are times when I think that I ought to know better what to do with it. What it’s for. Sometimes it seems entirely pointless.”
McEwan, Ian. Machines Like Me (p. 253). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
It would be inhumane of humans to keep any “being” with this mental capacity from using it, especially since Adam is a non-violent machine. He is programmed to love, even if that comes with Charlie’s discontent.
Speaking of love, Adam should be given a right to find his own love and keep it. A right to marry, even.
In the story, the reader is aware of Adam’s love for Miranda. Unfortunately, this is an issue for Charlie because he, too, is in love with Miranda. To that end, I believe that these devices should have the right to live freely and find their own loves. They should not deceive them, but be genuine and honest to their potential partners about the fact that they are not human, but humanoid AIs that are fully capable of romantic human love. As long as the encounters are honest, the love can be as true as any other.
Humans lie to each other all the time-especially to their romantic partners in times of hardship and uncertainty. The issue humans have is always truly believing we are superior to any other being or thing.
We can only see through our human lenses. Who are we to give and/or take rights away from anything-even if it is our creation?
You make a lot of really good points in this post. Yes Adam has a few things to learn—like how to be physically gentle when grabbing someone’s arm and how to balance emotions and the desire for justice—but otherwise Adam is almost human. It could easily be argued, as you have done, that he should therefore be given rights similar to humans’. When reading your argument, my attention was particularly drawn to the section about love. It is confusing wondering to what extent an AI could actually love, but I think if they truly can, they should be allowed to. I particularly appreciate and emphasize your point about honesty; that’s a really important relationship detail, especially if the AI were involved with a human instead of another AI.
LikeLike