Read Online Terminator and Philosophy: I'll Be Back, Therefore I Am by William Irwin, Kevin S. Decker, Richard Brown - Free Book Online
Ads: Link
in T2 brought a lump to your throat, you’ll likely feel that there is nothing metaphysical or deeply moral in the divide between human and machine. You therefore may be well placed to meet Skynet halfway and forge the new human-machine social contract. If you think only of HAL’s chilling sotto voce, of the robot in Lost in Space with his hooks aimed menacingly to destroy the Jupiter 2’s control systems, or of piles of skulls crushed beneath the tracks of Skynet’s H-K supertanks, then you are likely in the grip of an automatic anti-machine stereotype. Time to reeducate, to see our robot friends for what they really are, or at least what they could be : self-aware entities just trying to get through the day. Our future may depend on cooperating with intelligent machines. As the T-101 urges, “Come with me if you want to live.”
4
UN-TERMINATED: THE INTEGRATION OF THE MACHINES
Jesse W. Butler
There’s a provocative tension in the Terminator saga that has to do with the relationship between humanity and the technology it produces. On one hand, the original Terminator portrays technology as a malevolent force directly at odds with the interests of humanity. With the emergence of Skynet as a conscious being, a war between humans and machines ensues, each attempting to exterminate the other. From this perspective, our relationship with technology is threatening, with the potential for the complete destruction of the human race. On the other hand, technology serves vital roles in the lives of the human characters in the Terminator films. Consider, for example, the roles taken on by the Cyberdyne Systems Model T-101 in Terminator 2: Judgment Day , where the cyborg played by Arnold Schwarzenegger is not only the lifesaving protector, but also the close companion, and even father figure, of the young John Connor. This unlikely juxtaposition raises a philosophical question: is the development of technology, particularly the rise of machines that can think and act independently, a good thing or a bad thing for humans? Could it be a paradoxical mix of both good and bad? A double-edged sword that both serves human ends yet threatens to end humanity itself?
It isn’t hard to figure out what James Cameron, the creator of the Terminator saga, thinks. In his universe, it’s clear that technology may pose harm to humanity that far outweighs any benefits it might provide. But don’t take my word for it: Cameron himself states, “Human beings just inherently can’t be trusted with technology. They’ll create things like nuclear weapons and Terminators.” 1 From his perspective, technology might be something we’d just be better off without. Indeed, if there had been no Terminators in the first place, there would’ve been no need for the protection provided by the T-101 cyborg to the young John Connor. In this case, the only benefit technology appears to provide is in repairing the harm it caused. Perhaps we, too, would be better off without intelligent machines in our lives, and should wipe out their earliest models now, before they have a chance to do us in!
But is this really the perspective we should have on technology? Should we leave the Terminator films fearing the future potential of intelligent machines as an independent force that could possibly turn against us or even wipe us out altogether? In fact, the answer is no. In contrast to the “us-versus-them” dichotomy portrayed in the world of Terminator , our relationship with technology is actually one of continuity, mutuality, and integration. We need to realize that technology is, for better or worse, a natural extension of human activities. The machines and computational processes that pervade our lives are not in essence something different from us—not an “Other.” Instead, they are essentially connected to us, and us to them.
From this perspective, a sentient cyborg, including even a human-terminating cyborg
4
UN-TERMINATED: THE INTEGRATION OF THE MACHINES
Jesse W. Butler
There’s a provocative tension in the Terminator saga that has to do with the relationship between humanity and the technology it produces. On one hand, the original Terminator portrays technology as a malevolent force directly at odds with the interests of humanity. With the emergence of Skynet as a conscious being, a war between humans and machines ensues, each attempting to exterminate the other. From this perspective, our relationship with technology is threatening, with the potential for the complete destruction of the human race. On the other hand, technology serves vital roles in the lives of the human characters in the Terminator films. Consider, for example, the roles taken on by the Cyberdyne Systems Model T-101 in Terminator 2: Judgment Day , where the cyborg played by Arnold Schwarzenegger is not only the lifesaving protector, but also the close companion, and even father figure, of the young John Connor. This unlikely juxtaposition raises a philosophical question: is the development of technology, particularly the rise of machines that can think and act independently, a good thing or a bad thing for humans? Could it be a paradoxical mix of both good and bad? A double-edged sword that both serves human ends yet threatens to end humanity itself?
It isn’t hard to figure out what James Cameron, the creator of the Terminator saga, thinks. In his universe, it’s clear that technology may pose harm to humanity that far outweighs any benefits it might provide. But don’t take my word for it: Cameron himself states, “Human beings just inherently can’t be trusted with technology. They’ll create things like nuclear weapons and Terminators.” 1 From his perspective, technology might be something we’d just be better off without. Indeed, if there had been no Terminators in the first place, there would’ve been no need for the protection provided by the T-101 cyborg to the young John Connor. In this case, the only benefit technology appears to provide is in repairing the harm it caused. Perhaps we, too, would be better off without intelligent machines in our lives, and should wipe out their earliest models now, before they have a chance to do us in!
But is this really the perspective we should have on technology? Should we leave the Terminator films fearing the future potential of intelligent machines as an independent force that could possibly turn against us or even wipe us out altogether? In fact, the answer is no. In contrast to the “us-versus-them” dichotomy portrayed in the world of Terminator , our relationship with technology is actually one of continuity, mutuality, and integration. We need to realize that technology is, for better or worse, a natural extension of human activities. The machines and computational processes that pervade our lives are not in essence something different from us—not an “Other.” Instead, they are essentially connected to us, and us to them.
From this perspective, a sentient cyborg, including even a human-terminating cyborg
Similar Books
