As soon as the mode user believes that machines can have emotions, the common sense about artificial person will begin to skew towards their rights and responsibilities. Humans are just like that.
Myself? Haven't considered, in years, plants, animals, humans, or machines fundamentally different as long as they process information : besides that we have a bunch of class rules to keep society under control.
Politics really is at the heart of it all.
At 42, I still get anxious when studying large blocks of unknown information. So I have to remind myself to
I find it helpful that I have this understanding of the cognitive architecture of my consciousness.
Metaphysics 101 for social scientists.
Everyone knows "money = power", but fewer know "power = morality". Therefore in answering fundamental questions like "what is money?", one valid answer is, "a kind of moral narrative".
Due also to the cybernetic identity, "control = communication", we may elucidate the fact that money is documentation for power.
The liberal arts of the 19th and 20th century were :
However, they haven't been called that ... in fact people think these are the opposite of liberal arts. But they are indeed the skills of "free persons" vs "slaves". Now sure how this changes in the 21st.
---
Artificial wombs will be liberating for women - unless, artificial intelligence first renders the human genome obsolete. Aha, an interesting frontier to observe.
"Commitment phobia" is about unquantified liabilities. We simply cannot Manage what we don't quantify. And we shouldn't commit to doing so.
Emotions? Quantify it. Bodies? Quantify it. But many of us can't, or won't, and we will try to socialise our failures, demanding to be babysat - we demand a commitment to unquantified liability.
Emotional socialists are furious when others don't catch their fall. They refer to anyone who doesn't, as a sociopath. We should Manage this disability charitably.
... humans are broadly limited by the topology of their sensory nervous system / SNS, as well as the hidden layers of computation between the SNS and episodic memory / EM ( what Kant might refer to as the apperception of personal identity ) ... which may be conscious, or subconscious, in computation. This is the biological / pre-cultural concern ( this is also a gradient, as culture and biology have interactions across generations ). Some gestalts are already in the genome, so to speak - it's possible to consciously rewire these, but it's harder to get to.
... this is the cultural, or modelling layer. Most gestalts are here, and can be reflectively rewired in philosophical i.e. analytical discussion.
... this is the subset of culture which pertains to how mental models are represented in verbal ( text or speech ) form, i.e. what is commonly referred to as natural language. This is what we commonly refer to as learning other languages.
Instead of remaining silent in casual discussions with friends, I often reply with
"I cannot affirm your point,"
whereby I sometimes get another response about my affirmation being un-needed ...
I was certainly not thinking about the counterparty's needs lol ... generally I am only thinking about my liabilities!
---
It is also of a greater liability to say, "I deny your point," therefore I have stopped using that phrase though it has been recommended that I use it, by some.
