Page 1 of 1

Should we force people into slavery or make them love it?

PostPosted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:08 pm
by Nepene
The current comic raised an issue, where the robot protagonist has been created as a slave who enjoys being a sex slave.

In our modern society, for those sorts of jobs we simply pressure down on their luck homeless people and such to be sex slaves or pay a small number of very beautiful people lots of money.

Is the future society, where manual laborers are created to enjoy grudge labor with all of their sentience, better, or a modern society where we maybe pay people a lot of money to do such things, or pressure the down and out?

It reminds me of the philosophical quandry of the pig that wants to be eaten. Is it ethical to be a meat eater if the animal consents?

This was an ethical issue that was pushed in the previous comic.

JH: So humans giving milk is okay, cows giving milk isn't?
MH: Well, ask yourself this - if you knew someone with a brain disorder who possessed the mental capacities of a Holstein, would you consider it ethical to farm them?
JH: Jeez, that's a nightmare scenario. How about meat, would you eat human meat, if it were freely offered?
MH: Pasteurization doesn't fix those health issues. But if you could engineer a sentient cow, one who knowingly consented to be eaten, and not just because she was programmed to do so? Absolutely.

And in there, she suggested the line to draw was that they had to not be programmed into it. Zoa is certainly programmed to be a sex slave. What do people think of programming sentient beings to be sex slaves? Do you have any suggested alternatives for a society for unpleasant tasks?

Re: Should we force people into slavery or make them love it

PostPosted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 10:48 pm
by Unanswered
For my two cents, I'm going to go with 'programming' slaves as the right answer (if we are assuming that slaves are necessary here, which I probably wouldn't concede otherwise). However, I will add the caveat that this does not cover reprogramming someone or something that was previously free (read: had free will) into being a slave, as the reprogramming is definitely infringing on the already established personhood of the person before programming.

To be honest, I don't see a compelling parallel between this and the 'pig that wants to be eaten', necessarily - in the case of the pig, it can be argued that the pig was programmed against its own basic self will; i.e., it wants its life to end so it can be eaten. In the case of Zoa, however, being a slave is not necessarily detrimental, mainly because, if the programmers had any sense, they should have designed Zoa's AI structure with that goal in mind.

A counter-argument to this might be, "But Zoa's free will is being taken away via its predesigned programming!" Even if Zoa is sentient, I feel it a doubtful claim that a robot that has been programmed to act as what is essentially a door-to-door salesthing is an unfettered AI. As Zoa must then be fettered (if not completely constrained, so as to give the illusion of humanity to customers), can we really say that Zoa has free will to be damaged by its programming? We already established that it is programmed to perform as many sexual acts as possible, which would not interfere with its minor, unimportant actions (namely, those that would not cause it to deviate from its purpose), and if it is fettered as well, to make it want to always give blowjobs and have that be its main purpose, then other acts of will were never on the table, because they were never possible.

So if the slaves are so designed that they cannot be anything other than slaves, I don't really see a problem with it.

Hope I didn't step on any toes.

Re: Should we force people into slavery or make them love it

PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:10 pm
by Killjoy
I'm going to reject the false dichotomy, and say "neither".