In this blog post, we explore whether emotional robots deserve the same respect as humans, using the film A.I. as our lens.
Machines are evolving rapidly. It may not be too far in the future before machines, specifically robots, possess intelligence and the ability to make their own judgments. The 2001 film A.I. took this a step further, depicting a robot capable of emotion. When exactly such a robot might become a reality is currently unknown. Even if it becomes feasible, as with many scientific issues before, controversy will arise over whether developing such a robot is truly necessary. However, looking at the history of scientific and technological development, progress continues; it does not stagnate or regress. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the situation when such robots are developed. In this essay, based on the film A.I., I considered what problems might arise if robots with actual emotions were developed and we had to live alongside them in daily life, and in what direction such problems should be resolved.
First, let’s examine the overall plot of A.I. The film is set in a distant future where the greenhouse effect has caused polar ice caps to melt, submerging cities, and where even natural resources have been depleted, placing Earth in crisis. Many nations, judging they can no longer sustain their populations, legally restrict pregnancy. Consequently, there arises a need for robots that can function as members of society without consuming resources. At this point, science and technology have advanced to an incomparably higher level than today’s, enabling the development of robots not only for human convenience but also capable of possessing human-like emotions. Henry and Monica, facing the situation where their only son Martin is afflicted with an incurable disease and unable to live a normal life, adopt the robot David as an experiment. Programmed to love humans, the robot David recognizes Monica as his mother and adapts to human society. However, when Martin recovers from his illness and returns home, David is abandoned in the forest along with his teddy bear. David embarks on a journey to become a real boy in order to regain his mother’s love, but ultimately fails to achieve his dream and his functions shut down.
Anyone who has seen this film likely felt compassion for David and experienced a lingering emotional impact long after the credits rolled. Though David is a robot, not a human, we feel the emotion of compassion for him. Monica, a character in the film, also feels maternal affection for David, albeit briefly, but abandons him when Martin returns. Yet she too feels compassion for David. Monica knew David would be scrapped immediately if returned to the lab, so she abandoned him in the forest with a teddy bear, hoping he’d be mistaken for a human child. Yet the fact remains that she abandoned him. Would she have made that choice so easily if David were human? We might make the same choice if we were actually in Monica’s situation, yet we still feel compassion while watching the film because David is a robot with emotions. I believe that if emotions are given to robots, even if they aren’t perfectly equal to humans, it’s reasonable for robots to be treated to some extent like humans. In other words, we must recognize emotionally capable robots as a new concept existing somewhere between machines and humans and respond accordingly. Consider the difference between a machine like a vacuum cleaner and an emotional robot. A vacuum cleaner can be discarded without hesitation once it becomes useless, but a robot with emotions like David possesses value beyond mere machinery and should not be treated that way. I will explain the reasoning behind this gradually.
To determine whether the claim that emotional robots deserve respect holds merit, I wish to examine several questions. These are questions people might have upon encountering the argument presented here. By providing answers, I aim to aid understanding of the argument. First, one might question whether the robots claimed to be worthy of respect in this article can be accepted as living beings. Respect for non-living things is not easily accepted. But robots are obviously not living beings. One of science’s ultimate goals is to create a complete living organism not through natural processes, but through science and technology. Countless scientists have relentlessly pursued this challenge throughout history and will continue to do so. However, living organisms are unimaginably complex. Therefore, creating a robot with the characteristics of an actual living being seems impossible at present. And even if it were possible, it would be far removed from the robot in the film A.I. discussed in this essay—a robot possessing emotions. Even the robots in this film, set in a distant future of highly advanced science and technology, are not entirely identical to humans. Therefore, regarding the earlier question of whether robots can be accepted as living beings, the answer is obviously no—they are not biologically alive. However, the question of whether robots are living beings is not highly relevant to what this essay aims to discuss. The reason I argue in this essay that robots should receive a certain level of treatment from humans is not because they possess a form close to biological life, but because they possess emotions.
So, is the question of whether non-living robots can receive treatment from humans meaningful? Receiving treatment from humans is not a biological issue, but a social one. In the situation depicted in this film, robots become integrated into various aspects of human life due to social necessity. Here, social necessity means not only convenience for humans, as mentioned earlier, but also the fundamental need to exchange emotions to gain emotional comfort essential for living. The film places greater emphasis on the latter. Emotions profoundly impact daily life and are so crucial to humans that they can serve as a yardstick for evaluating one’s life. For instance, when reflecting on life before death, some may evaluate their existence through economic success or social prestige, but most will consider whether they lived a happy life, assessing it from an emotional perspective. Therefore, robots capable of emotion, especially in the harsh environment depicted in this film, could provide greater solace than anticipated to humans living under such conditions. However, merely acknowledging this comfort without extending respect to the robots providing it amounts to disregarding the importance of emotion in human life. Therefore, even if robots are not respected as living beings, they can be respected as entities possessing emotions, not mere lumps of metal.
Yet regarding the argument that robots provide humans with important emotional comfort, one might think that if a robot’s emotions aren’t genuine, it’s unreasonable to expect respect even if it possesses emotions. So, can a robot’s emotions be considered real? Emotions are something distinctly felt in human relationships, yet they remain an abstract concept difficult to define. But if emotions can be exchanged between two or more entities, and if those exchanged emotions can influence and alter the emotions themselves—for example, if love isn’t merely given and received, but can grow stronger because of the love received—then, based on the discussion in this film, robots can be said to possess genuine emotions. This is because David, by loving Monica, constantly strives to earn her love; if the robot lacked emotions, it would not have made such efforts.
Even if a robot’s emotions are genuine, one could argue that humans ultimately created the robot possessing such emotions and therefore retain control over it. This is the final question I wish to raise regarding respect for robots. Even if a robot has emotions, if those emotions were created by humans, should that robot still be subordinate to humans? To answer this, let me offer a simple example. Consider the relationship between parents and children. One could argue that since a child is born from its parents, the parents should dominate the child. Of course, in reality, it is common for children to become independent from their parents as they grow older. I believe a similar logic can apply to robots with emotions. The moment a robot possesses emotions, those emotions become its own, potentially freeing it from human domination. In other words, an emotional robot becomes the subject of its own feelings, diluting the logic for human subjugation. However, just as a child continues to respect and care for its parents to some extent after independence, a similar dynamic could exist between humans and robots.
I will conclude this essay on the film A.I. I have argued that the emotionally capable robot depicted in this film deserves respect akin to that accorded to humans. The reasons are twofold: first, while not a living being, the robot becomes a subject worthy of human-like respect the moment it possesses emotions; second, as depicted in A.I., those emotions provide significant solace to humans. Of course, the author does not claim that the robots in A.I. actually exist; the discussion is based on the hypothetical assumption that such a situation could occur. Therefore, whether the matters discussed could actually happen, and what impact they might have on human society if they did, depends on future scientific and technological development.
