Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
the_animist_paradox [2012-04-29 17:26]
nik
the_animist_paradox [2012-04-29 17:32]
nik
Line 4: Line 4:
 Based on three assumptions; 1) that we are living in a "robot cargo cult", 2) that animism and materialism are incompatible, and 3) that we need ways of better understanding contextually sensitive human-machine complexes if we are to successfully design semi-autonomous artefacts. Based on three assumptions; 1) that we are living in a "robot cargo cult", 2) that animism and materialism are incompatible, and 3) that we need ways of better understanding contextually sensitive human-machine complexes if we are to successfully design semi-autonomous artefacts.
  
-We are building machines to live up to our expectations of how they should behave, based on what we have been told they can do. Pop culture, cinema, science fiction are thick with description, yet our artefacts are often created in "imitative rituals that are conducted without understanding the underlying cause of a phenomenon." We are living in a Robot Cargo Cult((Y. Fernaeus, et al. Are we living in a robot cargo cult?. (2009))).+We are building machines to live up to our expectations of how they should behave, based on what we have been told they can do. Pop culture, cinema, science fiction are thick with description, yet our artefacts are often created in "imitative rituals that are conducted without understanding the underlying cause of a phenomenon." We are living in a Robot Cargo Cult((Y. Fernaeus, et al. Are we living in a robot cargo cult? 2009.)).
 The central claim of "Animism, Rinri, Modernization"((Naho KITANO. Animism, Rinri, Modernization; the Base of Japanese Robotics. ICRA 2007.)) is that an Animist perspective on robotics, is at odds with the Materialist assumption that a robotic subjectivity is realistic, achievable and substrate independent. The animist position suggests ethics as an essential part of robotic development, while a materialist perspective suggests a flexible, rewritable, moral software as something independent. The central claim of "Animism, Rinri, Modernization"((Naho KITANO. Animism, Rinri, Modernization; the Base of Japanese Robotics. ICRA 2007.)) is that an Animist perspective on robotics, is at odds with the Materialist assumption that a robotic subjectivity is realistic, achievable and substrate independent. The animist position suggests ethics as an essential part of robotic development, while a materialist perspective suggests a flexible, rewritable, moral software as something independent.
  
  • the_animist_paradox.txt
  • Last modified: 2012-04-29 17:32
  • by nik