Nowadays, such fascinating fairy tales may become a reality in today's increasingly perfect robot technology and artificial intelligence technology, or in the near future. Let robots with human appearance and thinking mode come down from the assembly line and enter people's lives. However, once faced with the beautiful robot opposite sex, how many people can go forward like Pygmalion? Love or not love is a question.
Personally, I think that the relationship between robots and humans, including communication, love, * * *, and even marriage with robots, is more a technical issue than an ethical one.
If David Levy, a doctoral student specializing in artificial intelligence at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, really predicted in his doctoral thesis "Intimacy with Artificial Partner", it would be in 2050! What we need to do well may be more psychological preparation, not extreme panic. After all, it is unlikely to cause huge legal and ethical disputes and widespread social anxiety like human cloning and euthanasia.
For robot partners, there is no need to set too harsh a so-called bottom line, and bravely choose one to communicate. I love me, what's it to you? From a psychological point of view, happiness comes from the heart of the individual, and only the feet know whether the shoes are comfortable or not. From the perspective of pure psychoanalysis, I definitely support this thing!
Happiness comes from "I love", not "I am loved". What right does loving someone give you? In fact, it just gives you the right to love, and love is a paranoid relationship. You have no rights except love. There is no doubt that the emotional ability and love ability of robot partners are technical problems!
From the point of view of psychology and behavior, people's emotions are produced by desire at most. With the evolution of human beings, the functions of sexual relations and marriage have also undergone tremendous changes. In today's society, the divorce rate remains high, and the phenomena of flash marriage, unmarried marriage, online marriage, dink, Ding Chong, same-sex marriage, asexual marriage, single family (falling in love every day, not seeing each other every day) and so on subvert and impact the current marriage system are endless.
Homosexuality, for example, has existed since human beings. According to a strict statistical survey, there are 3.7% people in the crowd. Do you think it is a scourge or welcome support? Its foundation will not change. Many women with new knowledge even think that "marriage is not the only way to store love, or even the best way." If robot sexual partners will affect human reproduction, then, like the phenomena listed above, it is only the independent choice of a few non-mainstream people. From a humanitarian point of view, I will sympathize with and even moderately support these non-mainstream phenomena. After all, it provides more choices for people to pursue personal happiness and relieve anxiety.
In today's society, the function of marriage emotion is no longer to collect fruits, defend prey and reproduce, but to relieve anxiety and find companions, so robot lover should be a good choice. Robots that can communicate, know how to repay, and can set not to betray are great companions. From the perspective of psychoanalysis, on the psychological level, love is either a projection or a projected identity. Therefore, robots are no worse than real lovers in alleviating people's inner anxiety.
Reproduction may be a problem, and the controversy at this level can actually be understood as follows: everyone only sweeps the snow in front of the door and specializes in other people's bed affairs. If the failure of being loved can be avoided, then robot lover is a good way to relieve anxiety and get personal happiness. On the chemical and hormonal level, love is a chemical madness secreted by hypothalamus. We project love on people, things or robots, which is not contradictory to a certain part of the essence of love-relieving anxiety.
Modern people have full power and ability to choose their own way of life and stick to their own concept of mate selection. I have always emphasized a rather western point of view: human rights morality-in fact, it was left by our ancestors: "Don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you." Like cloning technology, it also transcends ethical disputes and benefits mankind. And the internet, a double-edged sword! But its positive significance is much greater!
The development of robots may be standardized and moderate, but there should not be too many negative controversies and criticisms as a stumbling block. The controversy caused by the so-called uncontrollable invention of human beings sometimes actually comes from the inner conflict between the fear of the unknown and the desire for control, and the anxiety of self-generalization caused by it.
For example, "Internet addiction syndrome" was invented to satisfy the narcissism of doctors. Doing one thing for a long time doesn't always mean a disease. Will parents who are worried about the damage of network pollution let their children come to my psychological counseling institution for psychotherapy because their children are studying 12 hours? I'll give them another one-"learning addiction syndrome"? Hehe, so back to this topic, by the same token, treating some human inventions and more and more double-edged swords, worrying, resisting and hesitating are not as realistic as brave acceptance and rational control!
As for the inexplicable panic and ethical disputes in the field of reproduction with cold machines, I think so: the * * * between the opposite sex in human sexual behavior has the purpose of reproduction, but it is not the only purpose (this is the difference between man and beast). * * * itself has the function of pleasure and communication. From the perspective of dynamic psychology, * * * released people's sexual desire and "libido"; But between the opposite sex, such as: * * *, sufficiency, * * *; Even * * *, homosexual sex, fetishism, and even * * * and other non-mainstream ways (also known as "sexual perversion") called "sexual preference disorder" in psychotherapy can be realized. Therefore, from the point of view of alleviating the anxiety of adults, a robot sexual partner with "feelings" and communication skills is definitely better than the currently popular and equally valuable inflatable dolls. This is definitely a leap!
Psychoanalysis, the field of psychotherapy I am engaged in, is the theory of studying people's love and hate. It is a challenge, a positive challenge and an opportunity to extend people's love, hate and interpersonal relationships to the robot field. I think so, I'm sure. This is what a modern person should have.
Perhaps, we all need a robot companion or lover! Because we have been extremely "inhuman" by growth and industrial civilization, robot lovers or industrial civilization have rewarded us.
In addition, professional psychological accompanying robots are a direction. The average number of professional psychologists in China is less than/kloc-0 per person for every 4 million people, and nearly 400,000 people commit suicide or attempt suicide every year. In fact, we are much more fragile than we think. It is actually a good field and direction to regard robots as partners and artificial tools that can communicate and treat each other equally.
The last question: "Robots can't harm human beings, and the scenes of robot riots described in many sci-fi movies are terrible …" Science fiction is science fiction, not reality. From the point of view of injury, as a psychotherapist, I have seen too many human injuries to myself and my companions (psychological level), and even countless, outrageous! So-why are we afraid of robots? Is it necessary for us to blindly resist and panic for no reason?