To answer your question I think we have to determine why it is that we have rights in the first place. Is it because we are sentient beings or is it simply because we are human. Well human rights are defined as rights which everyone is entitled to BY VIRTUE OF BEING HUMAN. So if it isn't human, then it shouldn't have any rights if if you ask me, I mean would you give bigsby or Google assistant or your cellphone camera which has AI features rights?? No you wouldn't.
There's a reason why in just about every movie about AI, the robots rise up and slaughter the humans, and that's because human beings become sentimental and start attaching longing qualities to inanimate objects. Just because it can talk back to you doesn't make it real, just because it may seem sentient doesn't mean it's truly alive, so no, I don't support giving it any legal rights, I don't even support making any sentient robots in the first place. I think you should check out the movie "Extinction", you'll get what I'm trying to say.
I think it was Fay Lapka, one of my favourite writers as a child who said that "Fiction is not just a product of our imagination, it's a prediction of what could happen". Anybody working on creating sentient robots like Sophia should probably thread carefully and be smart about whatever you're building, humanity is at the point where science and science-fiction are becoming dangerously close.
Legal rights refer to rights in accordance with the law,legal rights are based on a societies customs and laws, with the ubiquitous nature of law in mind it could be assumed legal rights exist in every modern society.An example of a legal right is the right to vote, in any society voting is considered a delicate issue as it involves the enthronement of a new leader charged with the responsibility of pleasing his people,different factors influence the voting choice of people some which may include the ability of the candidate to appeal to their emotions , with this example it's clear that a "conscious robot" will be incapable of participating in the electoral process making "it" unqualified to have such rights.
Another example would be the right to life, in most modern societies the right to life is embedded into the constitution making it a legal right, in the case of a "conscious robot " I'll assume "conscious" indicates it's intelligence which is not an indication of the existence of life, regardless of the robot being capable of making decisions and mimicking emotions, it would be illogical to grant it the right to life simply because it is not alive biologically nor emotionally , instead it should be protected by property rights.
Basically what I'm saying is a robot no matter it's mental capabilities should not and cannot be granted the same legal rights as humans simply because it is a lower "life" form.
To answer your question I think we have to determine why it is that we have rights in the first place. Is it because we are sentient beings or is it simply because we are human. Well human rights are defined as rights which everyone is entitled to BY VIRTUE OF BEING HUMAN. So if it isn't human, then it shouldn't have any rights if if you ask me, I mean would you give bigsby or Google assistant or your cellphone camera which has AI features rights?? No you wouldn't.
There's a reason why in just about every movie about AI, the robots rise up and slaughter the humans, and that's because human beings become sentimental and start attaching longing qualities to inanimate objects. Just because it can talk back to you doesn't make it real, just because it may seem sentient doesn't mean it's truly alive, so no, I don't support giving it any legal rights, I don't even support making any sentient robots in the first place. I think you should check out the movie "Extinction", you'll get what I'm trying to say.
I think it was Fay Lapka, one of my favourite writers as a child who said that "Fiction is not just a product of our imagination, it's a prediction of what could happen". Anybody working on creating sentient robots like Sophia should probably thread carefully and be smart about whatever you're building, humanity is at the point where science and science-fiction are becoming dangerously close.
Legal rights refer to rights in accordance with the law,legal rights are based on a societies customs and laws, with the ubiquitous nature of law in mind it could be assumed legal rights exist in every modern society.An example of a legal right is the right to vote, in any society voting is considered a delicate issue as it involves the enthronement of a new leader charged with the responsibility of pleasing his people,different factors influence the voting choice of people some which may include the ability of the candidate to appeal to their emotions , with this example it's clear that a "conscious robot" will be incapable of participating in the electoral process making "it" unqualified to have such rights.
Another example would be the right to life, in most modern societies the right to life is embedded into the constitution making it a legal right, in the case of a "conscious robot " I'll assume "conscious" indicates it's intelligence which is not an indication of the existence of life, regardless of the robot being capable of making decisions and mimicking emotions, it would be illogical to grant it the right to life simply because it is not alive biologically nor emotionally , instead it should be protected by property rights.
Basically what I'm saying is a robot no matter it's mental capabilities should not and cannot be granted the same legal rights as humans simply because it is a lower "life" form.
View this answer on Musing.io
View this answer on Musing.io