The soulfulness and evil seen in robots in Xenoblade Chronicles and Mass Effect 3 is an interesting entry into the ongoing conversation of what constitutes a person. In part because we enter into it with what is, really, another machine: the video game system.
Since "Frankenstein," our culture has been in conversation about whether we can create something with a soul. Did Frankenstein's monster have a soul? How about the Cylons of Battlestar Galactica? The Androsynth of Star Control II? Or Wall-E?
Two recent video games narratives have fed into this conversation and their contributions to it are worthy of examination -- if only because video games are so often overlooked in their contributions to cultural narratives (which is an increasingly ridiculous situation to be in, considering the rapidly rising number of American households with a video game system).
In Mass Effect 3, one of the most powerful scenes in the game comes from a dramatic confrontation between the Quarians and the Geth, a robotic race. Depending on the choices you've made, you can be faced with a decision as daunting as, "Which race deserves to live?" At face value, the question should be an easy one, except that players have been repeatedly confronted with the humanizing features of your Geth companion and the reckless inhumanity of Quarians. Your Geth companion poses the question that started the entire conflict between the Quarians and the Geth: "Does this unit have a soul?"
Many others have already connected these dots, but in discussing what does and doesn't have a soul, we're conversing about our personhood. Outside the world of Mass Effect, we sometimes grant quite a bit of humanity to our machines. We're attached to our technology. When our computer doesn't work we say it's being "dumb." We love our iPhone. Siri can answer lots of questions for us, including the meaning of life ("42"). Our iPhone even lights our way to the bathroom at night. As someone who works with undergraduate students, I know the trauma that can come from a lost smartphone. The world's ended. It's over.
And of course, there's a number of reasons for that trauma. We have saved phone numbers, the phone was expensive, there are pictures on the phone. But as Sherry Tuckle, author of Alone Together, would argue, we form a special attachment with these machines.
"Computers no longer wait for humans to project meaning onto them, " Tuckle writes. "Now sociable robots meet our gaze, speak to us, and learn to recognize us."
But there's a dark side to a soul too. Mass Effect 3 does an excellent job of depicting the player's Geth companion, "Legion," as an appealing and very sympathetic character. As sympathetic as Legion is, the Reapers are unsympathetic. As in the previous Mass Effect games, the Reapers are synthetic life, out to destroy all organic life in galaxy. But they aren't just the cold, command-oriented robots of The Terminator, but calculating, devious and evil.
The recently released Xenoblade Chronicles similarly presents these sorts of robots. The world of Xenoblade Chronicles is lived on the bodies of two great gods -- Bionis and Mechonis -- who are locked in eternal conflict. By and large, humans live on Bionis and machines live on Mechonis. So humanity itself lives in the midst of a human/machine conflict. Early in the game, the narrative presents a robot invasion that again shows less of the cold computing of The Terminator and more of the town ravaging in a Viking invasion. A crucial character is killed, but when the robot impales the character with blade-like fingers, it's an intimate killing, and beyond being satisfied, the robot appears to take great relish in the death.
As Frankenstein reflected, at the sight of his monster: "Its gigantic stature, and the deformity of its aspect, more hideous than belongs to humanity, instantly informed me that it was the wretch, the filthy daemon, to whom I had given life."
I suspect this debate has gone on for longer than that. For example, if two people breed, is a "soul" being created? Only if there is something called a "soul". That has been debated for a very long time. There are those of us who do not believe in souls.
I think this mirrors a real choice we have in reality that becomes more and more pressing as time goes by and technology progresses.
I am curious to what the real ending to ME3 is (in future DLC), since the original ending must have been all in Shepard's mind.
Exec #2: Yeah, I've had a team working on this over the past few weeks, and what we've come up with can be reduced to two fundamental concepts. One: People aren't wearing enough hats. Two: Matter is energy. In the universe there are many energy fields which we cannot normally perceive. Some energies have a spiritual source which act upon a person's soul. However, this "soul" does not exist ab initio as orthodox Christianity teaches; it has to be brought into existence by a process of guided self-observation. However, this is rarely achieved owing to man's unique ability to be distracted from spiritual matters by everyday trivia.
Exec #3: What was that about hats again?
Exec #2: Oh, Uh... people aren't wearing enough.
Exec #1: Is this true?
Exec #4: Certainly. Hat sales have increased but not pari passu, as our research...
Exec #3: [Interrupting] "Not wearing enough"? enough for what purpose?
Exec #5: Can I just ask, with reference to your second point, when you say souls don't develop because people become distracted...
[looking out window]
Exec #5: Has anyone noticed that building there before?
Some very interesting speculation in science-fiction.
I think we can agree that computers don't have "souls". Yet.
I tend to think that they will, at least by the same standards with which we attribute souls to humans. That is, I don't think souls are disembodied and exist, but are rather reflections of our concept of a person based on our intuitive psychological essentialist approach.
Why do only the Geth have to ask this question? Do the humanoid Quarians have souls? Can you prove that? "Souls" are a smokescreen.
The real question being asked is "Which do you, the (human) player, prefer? A species that looks like you, or one that thinks like you?" The game isn't pondering over whether robots can have souls, but what humans value. We've all played the game, "If I were stranded on a desert island and could only have one person with me, who would it be?" I don't really care if your answer is "Madonna" or "Steven Hawking"; what's really interesting is *why* you chose one over the other. That tells me what you value.
If you were stranded in a deserted galaxy and can only have one other species with you, would you choose the Geth or Quarians? Your answer tells me what you value. Do you value the body more than the mind, so you would take a disliked humanoid over a lovable machine?
"{I)n discussing what does and doesn't have a soul, we're conversing about our personhood."
Then let's talk about personhood. Whether something is a person is a matter of intellectual debate. What does it mean to be a person? How do we objectively measure that ability in others? Where do we draw the line? Is personhood really a binary function, or are there degrees of personhood?
But talking of souls ends the discussion. What is a soul? It's just God's definition of "what is a person". And each human defines God, including God's definition of "person". Asking "Does X have a soul" is just like asking "In your opinion (which you needn't justify), is X a person?"
So if you want to to talk about whether robots, aliens, or dolphins are "persons", the last thing you should do is drag souls into it. That reduces it from a rational discussion to simple, thoughtless opinion.
If machines ever get to the point where they might be considered persons, they will no doubt face a long and tragic struggle for recognition, just like everyone else who used to be shut out of the category did. We are reluctant to admit new members to the club, because the benefits are so generous.
See: http://revolutionofreason.com and http://www.youtube.com/RobertLBlackburn
It is perhaps premature to consider machines as alive, but I can tell that day is coming. The market virtually demands it.