19 replies to this topic

[eternaltraveler]

Presently in Austria a legal debate is underway to determine if a Chimp can be declared a person and benefit from personal donations.

http://www.breitbart...&show_article=1

If this chimp is declared a person it would be the first non-human intelligence to carry such a title.

Could have ramifications for other non-human intelligences down the road.

[eternaltraveler]

i suppose the title of my topic is a bit of a misnomer as humans are a type of ape, but you get the point.

[Live Forever]

Interesting. Part of me wants to see this and part of me doesn't. (my compassion for other animals, especially those close to us genetically vs. my desire to live longer by having animal experimentation) It will be fascinating to see how this shakes out.

[knite]

Well, I have always been curious as to what level of intelligence makes a person a person. I've read about how certain primates have the intelligence of a 6 year old. Does that mean a 4 year old is less of a person than these primates? Is personhood tied to intelligence at all? If these apes arent people, then when do children turn into people? Interesting and extremely difficult questions to answer.

[cyborgdreamer]

I don't know if you can put a sharp dividing line on personhood. Instead of calling apes or babies non-people, maybe it makes more sense to say they have less personhood than an intelligent adult.

[DJS]

Justin, I find it interesting that you placed this thread in AI&Singularity. I see it as more of a normative topic, but I would be interested to hear your opinion on what the correlation is (and I'm not saying there isn't either one, just curious).

This is a truly fascinating development BTW. Finally a news story that is worthy my paying attention to!

[Live Forever]

Not to put words into Justin's mouth, but I think he saw the correlation as one defining what "personhood" was. If it could be established that an animal outside of the human race was worthy of being entitled to all of the privileges of a "person", then that paves the way for an AI to be afforded the same rights.

[tamalak]

My impression is that "personhood" has nothing to do with intelligence.

Humans who are severely retarded or brain damaged are not eligible to be forced to take part in agonizing science experiments.

The abortion debate over when a developing human should be given rights rarely involves the intelligence of that developing human.

The purpose of the laws that protect us is just that, protection. We give ourselves special status to keep our society functioning and to keep ourselves relatively safe.

[DJS]

Here's a small, easy to digest, article by Bostrom which is directly applicable to this discussion:

Transhumanism: The World’s Most Dangerous Idea?

[DJS]

Not to put words into Justin's mouth, but I think he saw the correlation as one defining what "personhood" was. If it could be established that an animal outside of the human race was worthy of being entitled to all of the privileges of a "person", then that paves the way for an AI to be afforded the same rights.

I agree, but notice that the AI&Singularity subforum is in the Computing forum... I see a difference between ethical valuations and, say, the theoretical aspects of cybernetics and technological progress. Yet if the modeling of trends in "normative evolution" could be refined to the point of producing useful predictions (which I am highly skeptical of), then incorporating said modeling into the broader modeling of tech trends would be appropriate. That was my basic point, and since I have (and have always had) a hard time seeing how such a synthesized enterprise could be methodologically grounded, the correlation is not clear from my perspective. But this is just me being nitpicky.

[eternaltraveler]

if we have another AI & singularity area I'd be happy to move it there

I believe precedents like these could have grave implications to future AIs.

[eternaltraveler]

i actually see the implications toward non-human primates themselves as being relatively minor in comparison.

[DJS]

I complete agree with you Elrond. I just wish that there was some type of categorization on our boards for more and less vigorous forms of analysis. But this is just a community posting board after all so, as I said, I was being finicky.

The logic is simply that a precedent being set which works to dethrone the moral bias of Speciesism would favor transhuman ethics; an inference which I see as valid.

Very appreciative of you posting this story by the way. I'm sure it will get a sizable amount of coverage on the transhumanist talk lists.

[basho]

This all seems very close to the utilitarianistic ethical stance of Peter Singer:

He holds that a being's interests should always be weighed according to that being's concrete properties, and not according to its belonging to some abstract group such as a species, or a set of possible beings, or an early stage of something with an as yet unactualized potential.

[DJS]

Yes, Singer is an iconoclast in the field of ethics and the preeminent figure of the animal rights movement.

[DJS]

He holds that a being's interests should always be weighed according to that being's concrete properties, and not according to its belonging to some abstract group such as a species, or a set of possible beings, or an early stage of something with an as yet unactualized potential.

Of course, no ethical system is "air tight". Personally, I favor Singer's position, but the hole in this framework is that it wouldn't provide a reason why it is unacceptable to throw a new born baby into a trash compactor.

[DJS]

The refinement is to say that human potential is a valuable resource to society and, as such, should be protected by society. When "pro-lifers" try to extend this argument further, one must then make a value judgement between actual and potential life. Most progressives would argue that human rights (actual human's rights), including reproductive rights, trump the nonexistent rights of potential life.

Potential life should be seen as a resource, not as a source of agency that demands rights be accord to it.

[kent23]

Does a dog have Buddha nature?

[DJS]

which begs the question...

[Live Forever]

The sound of one paw clapping...