Contradiction And Acknowledgment Between Human Emotions And Social Robots

This essay discusses the contradiction and acknowledgment between human emotions’ and social robots, and how logical and rational human’s reaction which could bring positive and negative effects to society as robots develop. Finally, this essay will clarify the behaviour and assumed role of social robot in the future by emphasizing impact of human robots interaction on the help recipients’ social and emotional responses. Social robots are physically embodied and autonomous agents that are communicate and interact with humans on an emotional level. Some people may not see the differences between social robots and industrial robots and computers. It is important to understand and distinguish social robots from inanimate computers, as well as
Human’s reactions to such robots appear to stem from our inherent inclination to anthropomorphize objects. In the other words, humans endowing objects with human qualities, that act autonomously, especially when social robots are designed to demonstrate social behaviour. Social robots are able to mimic humans’ behaviour and cues that humans automatically associate with certain states of minds like humans’ emotions or feelings. Even currently, such robots are able to elicit emotional reaction from humans that are similar, for instance, to how humans react to humans and animals. Soldiers in war are always ready to see the death of people, but when the soldiers saw the death of the robot it is caused more feelings of regret even if soldiers accustomed to seeing death every day. According to Matthias Scheutz gives an example in “Robot Ethics”, when the United States military began testing a robot that defuses landmines by stepping on them, where the colonel in command called off the exercise because the robot was modelled like an insect with six legs and every time robot stepped on a mine, robot lost one of its legs (211). Besides, Matthias Scheutz points out, “ [t]he colonel just could not stand the pathos of watching the burned, scarred and crippled machine drag itself forward on its last leg. The test, he charged, was inhumane” (211).These shows that social robots that are using
Today robots are increasingly begun to meet in human’s lives, so it may cause that human may incidentally dehumanize relationships with human by using social robots often. One example given in “Robot Ethics” by Matthias Scheutz, major group are owners of Roomba vacuum cleaners that been interviewed of studies over several years, given that Roomba is one of the most sold autonomous robots ( 213). These studies shows that, the mere fact that an autonomous machine keeps working for humans at homes day in day out seems that could trigger humans’ emotions, it turns out that humans, over time, develop a strong sense of gratitude towards the Roomba for cleaning their home. Thus, Roomba owners’ are want to do something nice for their Roombas even though the robot does not even know that it has owners. By using new forms of techno- interaction that pervade in daily life, humans’ interaction with each other, face to face, is already changing, so humans may lose real- world relationships. According to “Dehumanizing Robots” by Nourbakhsh, “[p]oint is not that robot equal human, but that if we begin ascribing agency to robots, and treat those robots unjustly, then we are unethical, and we will be inconsistent with our moral