Golems: Are they "alive"?

[Hainted]

My WIP has Golems. They are powered by Eitr, a silvery-blue liquid that is utilized in their construction. Researchers have discovered that Eitr is similar to the animating force of the soul(not the higher Consciousness partthat houses the individual) Because of this they are afforded some basic legal recognition because they are sentient(like elementals, poltergeists, or talking animals), but lack Sapience (like Orkhes, Aelves, Daktyls, Humans, etc...). Some groups are pushing to have this changed because they believe they are equal to any sapient race, and society's use of them is tantamount to slavery.

My take is this: I can see the argument for them to be recognized as making some sense. The Eitr strikes me as more "living" than a robot's programming, and power source, plus they learn and change as they interact with other beings. However I can't bring myself to see them as true equals. I can't imagine one painting a picture(especially an abstract), or contemplating it's existence or even buying decorations for it's off duty space. Throw in the fact that Golems can't make more Golems or utilize magic( but can be enchanted) and I've got this group that hangs in some kind of existential limbo. So Are They ALIVE? and are they more or less alive than say the Droids from Star Wars?

 

[Feo Takahari]

"Can a robot write a symphony? Can a robot turn a canvas into a beautiful masterpiece? "

"Can you?"

More seriously, look into the behavioral patterns of folks with mild intellectual disabilities.

 

[Queshire]

I'm admittedly biased as I always tend to support AI rights in fiction and often treat golems as Magic!robots but looking at it from the point of legal rights I don't see how what you mentioned matters. A mute person doesn't deserve less rights because they can't sing. Now the important question is if they can take responsibility for their actions. Do they have the free will to do what's right even if it means denying their instincts and orders? I doesn't matter if its hard or near impossible to do, can they do it in any capability? If so then I think they deserve the same rights as anyone else.

 

[kirai]

The argument is: can anyone actively communicate with the golem? Do people know what the golem is capable of outside the physical speculation? I say this because it's been shown time and time again how we underestimate animals and their capabilities. An elephant is capable to drawing tangible things and playing music. A gorilla can understand what death is and mourn the loss. A chimpanzee attempted to teach its offspring basic sign language. A parrot can memorize colors and shapes.

If you feel like that they aren't sapient, then perhaps they're not.

 

[Hainted]

To me the difference between Golems and Robots(or androids) lies in programming. A Robot requires massive amounts of code, and processors, electronics etc... while Golems once the proper rites are performed, and construction finished, are taught more like living things. Logical thinking isn't a problem, it's the abstract they struggle with

To me it comes down to us. We already treat machines like they're alive. Fussing at them, talking to them etc... Things like Siri blur the line even more, but an artificial being who can learn, talk back, and reason wipes the line out. In fact this question is the heart of my WIP as my society tries to grapple with this question. Are Golems sapient? Do they deserve more rights, or less? do they take jobs from those who need them? Should someone be allowed to marry one? When one goes "off" and starts terrorizing people is it guilty of the crime or the is the owner/builder? If you destroy one have you committed murder?

It's taking me down some strange roads and I'm loving the feedback, so keep it coming.

 

[CupofJoe]

I don't confuse anthropomorphism with sapient behaviour. When I talk to an AI system on my phone I know its a machine, but my programming kicks in and says thank you when I get an answer I want.

I see what you are getting at... RAM vs ROM
A Robot [et al] with have a lot of ROM and little RAM. It's programming is pretty much fixed and its limits known.
A sapient entity will have lots of RAM and only a little ROM. It has to learn what it can and cannot do...
I could see that in a world where there are such diverse beings, developmental and not functional test would be used to decide sapient status...
Has a thing learnt what it it has become?
Or was it given what it was needed to perform a task?
For me the definition or possibility sapient behaviour [self awareness?] would lie outside the day to day function of its "life".
Has it learnt to play music or paint because it wanted to?
Does it tell jokes or lies because it wants to?
Has it done something counter to it's own survival just to see if it can?

I don't think there would or could be a binary distinction between sapient and non-sapient that was not too inclusive or exclusive. There will always be a grey area [and that area will move as things and attitudes change...] where it has to be a judgement call.
Now who gets to judge... that is a really big question...

I was listening to a piece on the rise of Robotics in health care and there is evidence that children with autism spectrum disorder and older people with Alzheimer's react better to robots which have less human features/reactions/emotions than ones with better human approximations, because they are less confused by them.
This is a wonderful world we are moving into...

 

[Hainted]

CupofJoe: Exactly. The whole idea for the story came out of worldbuilding. It's a Modern Fantasy world, and I was wondering how they would classify the various beings that inhabit it. Would a Dragon(with intelligence, speaking ability, and loads of disposable cash) have the same rights as a Human? Would Ghosts or Fey be protected by special laws? What would be the line between fully equal under the law, and limited rights? I mean Harpies, and Mermaids look human, but would you want them voting in a general election?

The Golem represented a very interesting case for me. A created being(shades of Asimov or Shelley) presented all kinds of interesting questions to explore. I just couldn't resist.

 

[Addison]

If you've seen Frozen then you've already seen two golems. Olaf and the big guy that beats up the soldiers. How alive they are and act depends on how much of what magic is given.

 

[The Blue Lotus]

Read this- Golem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Yes it is wiki but it has some good info.

 

[Creed]

Very interesting.
Biologically something must reproduce, grow, metabolise and respire before being classified as "alive." The question has created some controversy around viruses, which are really cool, but technically aren't actually alive.
But I guess that doesn't apply to something on the macro scale, something with which we actually may interact with.
Whether or not I believe something is alive based on its artistic capability (which I don't think I would) is subjective; it's my own reaction. And everyone on here is going to have a different one.
Likewise with your characters- and that hangs on the society you create and the plot that unfolds.
If one of these golems does kill someone, and then is seen to show no remorse, it is likely that they will be seen as cold and mechanical. If it is capable of emotion (which lies with you and you alone) then perhaps the opposite sentiment will arise, and people will feel the need for golem rights.
When I wonder about androids being alive I come down to the maybe irrational conclusion that no, it's not- because it's missing something. And that something which I cannot define or explain or anything is pretty much summed up in the "soul". I don't really believe in "souls" but it is something my mind goes to every time. So if your world has a religion which puts emphasis on the soul (somewhat like Christianity) and the conclusion is reached by people in your world that the golem has no soul, then they won't likely rally for robot rights.
Similarly, if golems are magic, you should consider the people's reaction to magic. If it's holy, you bet that'll be a bonus for the golems. If it's witchcrafty or most classes don't trust it… well my condolences for the golems.
Another thing I might recommend looking at is a psychological effect known as the Uncanny Valley, where us humans grow attached to something the more human-like it seems, but at the point of being almost-human we are repulsed by it (sometimes violently).
Another li'l something something I would look at is the Geth from the Mass Effect trilogy and the books. It's an interesting conflict for sure- Quarians make the first true AI, they get scared and try to destroy them, the Geth desire to survive kicks in and the Quarians lose their homeworld. There's a lot to it (as I'm finding out in ME3 right now!).
Good luck! Hope that helps.

 

[Queshire]

Mmmm.... The whole no "soul" thing isn't a strong enough argument for me.

 

[Hainted]

Yeah, the no soul thing doesn't work for me, because the force that animates them is almost identical to the lower "soul". From a metaphysical view, a Golem is no different than a prisoner who's been turned into a Zombie by having their mind/will removed and stored in a talisman.

 

[wordwalker]

Sounds like your golems are definitely alive, but not sapient. Artificial or not, there's a word for that:

Animals.

 

[Hainted]

Yeah legally they have the same rights and animals, mostly, but the laws aren't enforced like they should be.

 

[Creed]

Mmmm.... The whole no "soul" thing isn't a strong enough argument for me.

It is a reaction to ingrained cultural taboo, and a subtle mix of psychology. Whether it not the reaction is awakened in you consciously or unconsciously would largely be a product of your upbringing and influences. If, say, you were hardcore doctrine on the importance of the soul, you would probably have nothing nice to say about robot rights.

Yeah, the no soul thing doesn't work for me, because the force that animates them is almost identical to the lower "soul". From a metaphysical view, a Golem is no different than a prisoner who's been turned into a Zombie by having their mind/will removed and stored in a talisman.

Exactly. They recognise it as something akin to their own, or at least just as classifiable, which wouldn't produce a terribly negative reaction, if one at all. The Zombie comment does not speak in the favour of the Golem's. Likening them to something without "mind/will" seems like there's no reason anyone would want to give Golem's rights. They seem like less than animals.

 

[Hainted]

It gets trickier when you consider the legal rights or protections of other magical, intelligent beings. Take Shrek for example. Does Shrek deserve the same rights and legal status as the humans of Duloch? Does Donkey, or Pinocchio or the Gingerbread Man? Legally there would be some precedent for every one of these beings or class of beings. Not to mention the Dragon, who may not be able to speak a human(oid) language, but is otherwise as intelligent as the other characters or the Frog Prince....

It would be difficult to be a lawmaker in most fantasy settings.

 

[Chessie]

I wouldn't say alive, but more animated. Golems are great, way to go on using them in your story!

 

[Addison]

I recently helped my kid brother with some quests on Wizard 101. During several quests he had to fight golems. Sand golems, blade golems, ice golems etc. The golems in the game were big, strong, powerful and their seemed to have only two purposes.
1. Patrol/ Guard an area

2. Bodyguard. (Once or twice there was a golem that could talk, the boss of the battle, but it was guarding the scepter and time ribbon..thingy.)

To paraphrase Richard Dreyfuss from Jaws, "Their only job is to patrol, attack and beat little people."
Of course this is only for Wizard 101, and the bigger evil snowman from Frozen. But, like in Frozen, a golem can have any purpose. To attack/protect or to be a friend. They are made for a purpose and they serve that purpose.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

I'd say there are two answers to your question. The first isn't are they alive or self aware - it's can they suffer? Animals have rights within our society - because rights are essentially what we as people accord others. And we accord animals the right not to be cruelly treated.

The second answer follows on from this through the matter of according rights. We as people accord rights to other people and animals, and they often vary. So we accord animals some rights, children other rights, and adults still other rights. The question becomes how do we decide which group get what rights? Now if at some point we came together to discuss golems' or AIs' rights surely our first step should be the old precautionary principle - first do no harm. And it seems to me that if we don't know if golems and AI's are alive we should instead of trying to decide on whether they are, simply assume that they are at some basic level and then treat them as such. That way if we're wrong and they aren't, no harm is done.

My own personal thought with AI's is that they are not and never will be alive. Nothing that is made completely of wires and programming etc can be. But we are clever enough that one day we will build them so well that they will be able to fool us into believing that they have some sort of life. They will pass the Turing test. At that point we will have an issue to deal with.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Queshire]

I don't think there's a significant enough difference between being made out of metal and oil and being made out of meat and blood.