Isaac Asimov is certainly one of the best-known science fiction writers in the world. This prolific writer published or edited more than 500 books, including science-fiction novels and novels, as well as numerous popular scientific works. His most famous works are from the Foundation universe and are part of the Robot Cycle.
The three laws of robotics were the result of discussions between Isaac Asimov and John Campbell on the subject of robots. They were explicitly mentioned for the first time in 1942 in the new Closed Cycle (Runaround). Here is the original wording:
law number 1: a robot can not harm a human being nor, remaining passive, allow a human being to be exposed to danger;
law number 2: a robot must obey the orders given to it by a human being, unless such orders conflict with the first law;
law number 3: a robot must protect its existence as long as this protection does not conflict with the first or the second law.
Note that the screenplay of Alex Proyas's film I, Robot, although based on the news of Asimov and more particularly on the book of the same name, detaches itself to find the classic scheme of the machine rebellion, a theme that was not to the taste of the author.
Indeed, Isaac Asimov has struggled all his life against the fear of science and technology, especially robots. He found stories of robot revolts and ridiculous cybernetic monsters. For him, robots were only machines, certainly sophisticated, but aiming only to perform the tasks for which the engineers had designed them. In order to ensure their fidelity and to avoid any danger for humans, the three laws had to be integrated at the lowest level of the "positronic brain" (in Asimov's terms) of the robots, thus guaranteeing their inviolability.
But before going further about the three laws, let's try in the next page of this file to understand why robots still inspire such fear today.
The anxiety aroused by the robots is not due to a single cause. We can find four origins: the first is instinct, the second religion, the third is neolude and the fourth cultural.
The first reaction when introducing an Android robot to a group of people is most often a mixture of attraction and apprehension. These machines provoke an interest among human observers, a curiosity towards these strange "beings" who resemble them. Nevertheless, almost immediately, this attraction is contained or even inhibited by the deep fear of being confronted with a potential threat. This primitive reaction is due to our social animal origin, which accepts or rejects an individual according to the recognition of his or her belonging to the group. This type of behavior is found in most social animals, especially the great apes.
The second explanation is religious belief. Indeed, throughout the Mediterranean basin, traditions have always condemned the creation of artificial beings. Thus, in Genesis, Adam is fashioned from clay, and this inert statue is animated by the breath of God. The creation of life can only be of a divine nature. The second commandment of the Decalogue explicitly forbids the creation of artifacts imitating life: "Thou shalt make no image carved, nothing like that which is in heaven above, or on earth here, or in the waters below the earth. "
A third explanation concerns the ever-renewed fear of upheavals brought about by technical progress. Throughout our history, machines have represented on one side a breakthrough that would make work less painful, and on the other an evil enslaving Man on behalf of a dominant social class. This fear is present today, especially since robots have indeed replaced the workers in many production plants to the chain, especially in the automotive sector. This results in a latent anxiety of being overtaken by technology, no longer being adapted to society, losing its job to be replaced by more efficient and more profitable robots. It is therefore not surprising that the robot, at the same time a symbol of technology and productivity, generates a negative reaction in the popular classes, those that experience the direct effects of change.
Finally, the fourth reason is of a cultural nature. By relying on mythical and religious traditions, during the awareness of the potential negative effects of the industrial revolution, romantic writers of the nineteenth century strongly contributed to the construction of the pejorative figure of the robot. Many of them have addressed, in one form or another, the theme of the accursed artificial creature: Hoffmann, de Villiers de L'Isle-Adam, Mérimée, Balzac, Poe ... Living statues at the Golem, Mechanical Men to Frankenstein's monster, from the fatal gynéides to the universal robots, it is these stories that have erected the robot into a mythical object. In Germany, Hoffmann recounts the tragedy of a man in love with an automaton he believed to be human (Olympia). In England, Mary Shelley shook classic dogmas in a Gothic novel haunted by a monstrous creature tormented by memories of a past she had not lived (Frankenstein).
L'Homme est le créateur des robots, ces nouveaux travailleurs infatigables. Mais les maîtres vivent toujours dans la crainte de la révolte des esclaves comme de la punition des dieux. Isaac Asimovtrouvait cette peur ridicule. « Je dois avouer qu'à l'occasion, lors de mes premiers essais, j'avais tendance à considérer un peu le robot comme une sorte de jouet. J'y voyais une créature totalement inoffensive, juste préoccupée d'exécuter le travail pour lequel on l'avait conçue, incapable de causer le moindre préjudice aux Hommes, servant de souffre-douleur aux enfants, tandis que maints adultes - victimes d'un complexe de Frankenstein (comme je l'appelle dans certains de mes récits) - voulaient à tout prix considérer ces pauvres machines comme des créatures mortellement dangereuses. »
robotics
0 Comments