Should humans "remote-control" other entities?
The ultimate slavery is the take-over of another entities motor controls. This is being done by roboticists to rodents and insects. Is this ethically acceptable, even for the purpose of using creatures to investigate disaster sights for survivors?
Sapiens plurum entities are made up of people and technologies who make decisions that affect other people and technology groups linked to them. If we are becoming one creature or group of creatures, should people consider themselves the controllers of other creatures, as, say, the motor planning and execution regions of our brain direct motor movements.
The Internet of Things puts measuring devices, appliances, autos and many other tools under our remote control. Will the line between living, non-deterministic creatures and non-living deterministic things remain? Will we constantly be tempted to cross that line and dominate weaker living things? Is this wrong? If we create bio-beings specifically for our own use, is it wrong to enslave them, even though that is the only reason for their existence? And if a being is 90% bionic and only 10% human, is the answer the same, or does it depend on which part is human?
Sapiens Plurum: Evolving interconnections of people & their creations »Sapiens Plurum: Evolving interconnections of people & their creations
The future of humankind »The future of humankind
Well-being Issues »Well-being Issues
Should humans "remote-control" other entities?
Global Forum Should Study Direct-Brain Interface Impacts »Global Forum Should Study Direct-Brain Interface Impacts
Insignificance/Powerlessness »Insignificance/Powerlessness
Animals »Animals
People »People
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)