Oh, the Inhumanity!

This post builds on the previous month's, found at

http://bioengineersatwork.blogspot.com/search?q=i,%20totbot

The class discusses biomedical implants which replace or enhance human physiology. A question is posed: 

"When does a person cross the line to become no longer human?"

...

Conversation soon evolves toward the definition of humanity, of sentience, of life.

Is humanity predicated on emotion? The class rallies in support of this notion.

Kenji, the fictional emotional robot then stirs up quite the buzz.

< http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-internet-keeps-falling-for-the-hoax-about-kenji-the-robot-programmed-to-love >

It's a deep-seated fear of the human condition, that a machine could rival our intelligence, our "soul." It's an anxiety writ large across the vast expanse of science fiction. The admiration—and simultaneous suspicion—of artificial intelligence, machines that live.

Star Trek becomes an oft-referenced base for fodder on the topic.

Data is comprised, most notably, of a positronic brain. He is initially unequipped with the ability to process emotion. Lore, his "evil" older brother, is programmed for emotion, and it (among other bugs in his programming) ruins him as a being in the world. As with most controversial relationships in Star Trek, this fear of machinated emotions is ultimately resolved. 

Once his emotion chip is at last installed, Data works through the difficulties of emotion, and goes on to be a fully realized member of the singularity. 

...

It is within the realm of modern technology to store data on DNA. Machines can be engineered to have randomized yet hierarchical initial programming, just as human lives present in their nascency. These robots cab continue to learn and remodel based on their experiences. Such heuristics inform the way humans grow, as the "Nurture" portion of Nature vs. 

In this way, yes, an entity such as Data could be human, could be alive and sentient. 

...

On the same note, in a different key, many people through the ages have been inhuman. Pol Pot, John Wayne Gacy Jr.: can these men be considered as members of a species who define themselves by their sense of empathy and love? If talk of morality or "soul" is enough to invalidate the life or sentience of an android, what gives men such as these the right to claim that same life or sentience?

...

NASA maintains a definition of life which focuses on philosophical openness, and careful phrases.

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxies/life's_working_definition.html

In a similar vein, Captain Picard makes a powerful argument for openness to new forms of life:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PMlDidyG_I

Quite specific information on emotional robotics

Argument for practical applications of emotional robots:

http://www.ted.com/talks/david_hanson_robots_that_relate_to_you.html

Machines and Morality:

http://www.cc.gatech.edu/ai/robot-lab/online-publications/moral-final2.pdf

Exploration of the human fear of robotic emotion: a brief summary of Data's handle on emotion:

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Emotion_chip

Argument for Social Robots:

http://www.ted.com/talks/cynthia_breazeal_the_rise_of_personal_robots.html

http://robotic.media.mit.edu/pdfs/other/Breazeal-Brooks-03.pdf

...

What is it that drives a person to classify as no longer human. Is it an increase in technology? Or could it be a matter of distance from the values of the greater good?