[SystemSafety] A General Theory of Love

[Les Chambers]

Hi all

It was inevitable that engineers should turn to the theory of love. And here
we are. A segment of the Australian Broadcasting Commission's (ABC) radio
show, Big Ideas featured engineers and sociologists discussing the concept
of robot love. 

Refer:
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/will-my-robot-love-me-
back/8490996

National Taipei University has active research programs.

Refer: Lovotics - loving robots

https://www.academia.edu/1258396/Lovotics_Loving_robots

 

In the ABC segment, Associate Professor of mechanical engineering from
Melbourne University, Denny Oetomo reflects, "Will my robot love me back."

Listening to Denny you'll probably get the impression as I did that we are
at the very early stages of investigation. He is followed by a psychologist
who insists it will never happen. I disagree - it's essential and
inevitable.

 

So, is it possible for a human being to love a robot? 

It's true that we tend to project human traits onto inanimate objects. Denny
spoke of bomb disposal experts bringing their destroyed robots back from
Iraq in harmony with the principle of leaving no one behind. They loved
them. They owed them their lives. But are we stretching this concept too
far? We'll see, as the emerging discipline of personality engineering gets
on the case.

 

If we could pull it off the possibilities in safety critical systems
engineering are eye watering. 

Three case studies off the top of my head:

Case 1: The loving annunciator. A voice in your automobile tells you to slow
down. Do you take any notice? If the voice is annoying, probably not. If the
voice is that of someone or something you trust, maybe. If the voice comes
from someone you love, for sure yes!

 

Case 2: The caring nurse. A bedside robot wakes you up to remind you it's
time to take your life-saving medicine. Irrational emotional states are a
feature of sickness. In despair our mental function is reduced. Is a loving
robot more likely to cut through the angst and convince you to act? 

 

Case 3: The mentor. From an early age you engage with an artificially
intelligent personal digital assistant who knows everything. She is with you
for every waking hour, much like Facebook is with millennials - only in a
much more productive role. Through constant interaction she senses your
interest in and a talent for applied science and mathematics. She prepares
you for a life as an engineer from the age of 10, the point at which many
career decisions are made; to the point where, when you reach university,
you have pretty much covered the maths and science curriculum at some level,
and not only that. From an early age you've been educated in the social
responsibilities of an engineer from Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics to
Viktor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning - to Lewis et al's A General Theory
of Love. Through storytelling you have worked through the ethical dilemmas
of hundreds of scenarios leaving you with an unshakeable belief in the
social responsibilities of engineers. So you walk into the engineering
workplace - a child fully formed as a professional, totally prepared for
what may come - a child who views engineering as a calling not a job and,
thus prepared, is physically incapable of an unsafe act.

 

All of the above is made possible by a transition in thinking from trusted
systems to loved systems - systems that harness the non-verbal but
incredibly powerful feeling forces of love.

 

So what is love. Shakespeare addressed it in Twelfth Night:

"What is love? 'Tis not hereafter.

Present mirth hath present laughter."

Denny defined it in a more abstract sense as: "The capability for emotional
engagement." 

 

So what drives engagement:

- shared beliefs

- shared experiences

- shared goals 

- empathy - the perception that 'the other' cares about you and feels your
pain.

 

>From this drop of water can we imagine an ocean. From this early green shoot
of insight can we visualise a massive boon to mankind. Getting there from
here will require new science, new models, evolving what is to what can be.
What do we now know from psychology that can be reduced and formalised into
code? What other sources of knowledge can we apply? One rich vein of
thinking that has been evolving for more than 2000 years is story theory.
Especially in the area of engagement, storytellers have known for millennia
that to love a story we must first engage with its hero. We must know what
she wants and want her to have it. 

 

I will be discussing how story theory can be applied to engagement,
persuasion, requirements capture and many other engineering tasks in a two
hour tutorial: Storytelling in Engineering: Explaining, persuading,
instilling belief and saving lives through Story,  at the aSCSa's Australian
System Safety Conference Wed 31 May 2017 in Sydney.  The conference theme is
"The evolving understanding and tools of the safety sciences".

http://assc2017.org/program.htm

 

Bring popcorn.

 

Cheers

Les

 

 

 

-------------------------------------------------
Les Chambers
Director
Chambers & Associates Pty Ltd
 <http://www.chambers.com.au> www.chambers.com.au

Blog:  <http://www.systemsengineeringblog.com/>
www.systemsengineeringblog.com

Twitter:  <http://www.twitter.com/chambersles> @ChambersLes
M: 0412 648 992
Intl M: +61 412 648 992
Ph: +61 7 3870 4199
Fax: +61 7 3870 4220
 <mailto:les at chambers.com.au> les at chambers.com.au
-------------------------------------------------

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20170505/3c55c61d/attachment.html>