Tiny Teaser for I, Robot
POSTED BY: BRTick
UPDATED: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 03:20
VIEWED: 4147
PAGE 2 of 2
I haven't reread the stories in a while, but many of the Asimov Robot stories (at least the early ones, collected in _I, Robot_) focus on various problems with the Three Laws. Loopholes, contradictions, ambiguities, semantics, etc, are all explored. The workings and failings of the Three Laws are really the focus of a lot of the Robot stories. I don't remember a story about a robot murder suspect, but I do remember at least one where humans were endangered by a robot.
Plus, it's later postulated by one of the robots that there is another Law, the Zeroth Law, which supersedes the previous three. For those who want to know, highlight:
Select to view spoiler:
A robot may not injure humanity, or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
Of course, the Zeroth Law introduces even more problems for the robots.
There's a nice (very long) paper about Asimov's Laws of Robotics as a thought-experiment at http://www.anu.edu.au/people/Roger.Clarke/SOS/Asimov.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Wait, isn't that just plural of the first law?
............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TeelaBrown:
Wait, isn't that just plural of the first law?
But the key is that it supersedes all the other laws. So, for example, a robot would be allowed to injure one human if doing so saves the rest of humanity. Obviously semantic problems and other ambiguities exist as well.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Piont. But wouldn't the robot just go somewhat crazy, as in the story "Catch that Rabbit", where the second and third laws contradict?
............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
(Feel free to reply to my earlier one, this is a short interlude).
Man, I feel so great! 
Discussing things I care about and at least my intelligence! (Well, you guys are above, but I can't have everything.)
............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by TeelaBrown:
Piont. But wouldn't the robot just go somewhat crazy, as in the story "Catch that Rabbit", where the second and third laws contradict?
Well, truth be told, I'm not really that familiar with the Zeroth Law myself, having only read _I, Robot_ and a few of the earlier Robot novels. I think the Zeroth Law was officially postulated in the 80's, though apparently Asimov had been thinking about it since the 50's. As far as I know, the Zeroth Law isn't actually programmed into robots positronically. It seems to be more like a logical consequence of the First Law. Pretty much the only concrete stuff about the Zeroth Law I remember is (major spoilers for _Foundation and Earth_ ahead)
Select to view spoiler:
When Daneel Olivaw talks about it at the end of _Foundation and Earth_. It seems he (or one of his close associates) first realized the Zeroth Law's implied existence, and he set in motion the Foundations. But then there were problems between the First and Zeroth Laws, so he sought to create Gaia so that eventually all of humanity would be one organism, so the Zeroth and First Laws would be the same. I think that's how it worked, anyway... my memory isn't what it used to be. :-P
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're right. It would be logical to assume that it would also apply to the human race as a whole, not just singular. It would be a consequence of the first law, as you said. I am really liking this little conversation.
............................................................................................
"Freedom is the Freedom to say that 2+2 makes 4. If that is granted, all else follws"-Winston, 1984
Keep flyin', and remember, THEY can't take the sky from US!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME