This blog post explores the boundary between humans and replicants through the film Blade Runner. It delves deeply into what it means to be an emotional being and where humanity truly originates.
The film Blade Runner presents a setting where corporations mass-produce and sell replicants for various purposes: combat, sexual gratification, general labor, and more. They are artificial lifeforms engineered for specific roles, acting based on implanted, manipulated memories and programmed tendencies. Should they deviate from their purpose, they are “retired” by special police officers called Blade Runners. What’s interesting is that the process is never described as killing replicants; only the term “retrieval” is used. This reflects a societal consensus to distinguish them from humans and treat them not as living beings, but as objects. Is treating replicants as objects truly right? I believe replicants are human too, and using them merely as tools for necessity is inherently unjust.
Before fully examining this argument, we must first consider whether replicants can truly be defined as human. If replicants are viewed not as humans, but merely as programmed machines, then removing them when they malfunction or fail would be ethically unproblematic. Indeed, the Blade Runners in the film treat replicants as tools, eliminating them without emotion. But can we definitively say replicants are not human? This forces us to reconsider what it fundamentally means to be human.
To determine whether replicants can be defined as human, we must first define the characteristics of a human. Humans possess high intellectual capacity and rich emotions, and are distinguished from other animals through bipedalism and social activity. Humans are beings capable of rational thought and choice based on high intellectual ability, rather than acting purely on instinct. Rationality encompasses not only logical thinking but also the capacity to explore life and one’s own existence, sometimes suppressing instincts to make higher-order choices. Furthermore, humans feel unique emotions, empathize with others’ feelings, and form complex relationships. In contrast, machines or computers can only react according to programmed instructions and cannot feel emotions like sadness, joy, or anger, making them fundamentally different from humans.
Examining the replicants in Blade Runner reveals they are distinct from simple clones created by replicating genes. They are artificial lifeforms designed based on existing human genetics, intentionally created to mimic human characteristics. They are born as adults with a lifespan limited to four years, but their other physical characteristics are nearly indistinguishable from humans. Not only are they physically indistinguishable from humans, but they also possess high physical abilities and agility, making them arguably superior to humans in purely physical terms. In essence, the only difference between them and humans is that they were “designed by humans.” From this perspective, distinguishing them from humans seems unreasonable.
Mentally, replicants also share some human emotional traits. The Voigt-Kampff test used in the film to distinguish humans from replicants measures emotional responses to questions. Replicants, who exhibit weaker or fewer emotions, show fewer subtle emotional shifts compared to humans, making them easier to identify through pupil changes. However, Tyrell explains in the film that replicants can develop emotions over time. This implies that the boundary between humans and replicants can become blurred through the interaction of emotions and memories. If replicants are granted longer lifespans and their emotions develop through accumulated memories and experiences, distinguishing them from humans would become increasingly difficult.
This explanation parallels the formation of emotions in actual humans. For instance, the fact that women raised in indigenous villages feel no shame about exposing their breasts while living there shows that emotions like shame are shaped by environment and learning. A real-life example is the case of a boy discovered in Chile in 2001 who lived with stray dogs for 11 years after birth, exhibiting dog-like behavior. He could barely speak and exhibited reactions detached from human society. Thus, even among humans, emotional development can vary significantly depending on social experiences and environment.
Therefore, the differences between cloned humans and humans can be seen as minimal beyond lifespan and age at birth, and the unique fact of being created by humans. However, since lifespan and age at birth issues can be resolved through technological advancement, the only remaining difference is that they are human creations. This parallels the slave systems of medieval Western Europe or the Goryeo and Joseon dynasties. Slaves were not treated as human beings; they were regarded as livestock or property, entities that could be disposed of at any time under their master’s authority. Yet we cannot claim they were not human. Ultimately, slaves were human beings just like the ruling class.
Moreover, the best way to determine whether they are human is to place them among humans and observe whether they can lead a social life. If they receive the same education as humans and integrate well into human society, this could be seen as evidence they possess the same characteristics as humans. For example, even if a monkey were educated identically to a human and placed in human society, it could never become human. Conversely, since cloned humans possess physical and mental characteristics identical or similar to humans, they are highly likely to blend naturally into human society.
Opponents argue that since cloned humans are created by humans for specific purposes, they cannot be considered human. However, one cannot help but question whether the mere fact of being different from humans grants the right to eliminate them. First, we must determine whether they belong to the category of humans. If they are human, we must then consider how unethical it is to treat them merely as tools.
In conclusion, it is wrong to judge cloned humans as non-human merely because of differences in their birth process, given they possess the same physical and mental characteristics as humans. Clones are equally entitled to the same rights as humans, and using them solely as tools for specific purposes is clearly wrong. The replicants in Blade Runner are highly likely to be created as increasingly human-like beings with future scientific advancements. Therefore, the necessity to treat clones as human beings will only grow stronger.
