The modern age of telecommunications has already made it possible to fall in love without ever having met face to face, Levy adds. “So many people nowadays are developing strong emotional attachments across the Internet, even agreeing to marry, that I think it doesn’t matter what’s on the other end of the line,” he says. “It just matters what you experience and perceive.”
Based on what researchers know about how humans fall in love, human-robot connections may not be all that surprising. Rutgers University biological anthropologist Helen Fisher, renowned for her studies on romantic love, suggests that love seems dependent on three key components: sex, romance and deep attachments. These components, she remarks, “can be triggered by all kinds of things. One can trigger the sex drive just by reading a book or seeing a movie—it doesn’t have to be triggered by a human being. You can feel a deep attachment to your land, your house, an idea, a desk, alcohol or whatever, so it seems logical that you can feel deeply attached to a robot. And when it comes to romantic love, you can fall madly in love with someone who doesn’t know you exist. It shows how much we want to love.”
Still, both Fisher and Levy agree that many if not most humans will continue to love and have sex the old-fashioned way. “But I think there are people who feel a void in their emotional and sex lives for any number of reasons who could benefit from robots,” Levy states. He cites a Massachusetts Institute of Technology student dubbed “Anthony” in M.I.T. psychologist Sherry Turkle’s book The Second Self, which explores human-computer interactions. Anthony tried having human girlfriends but preferred relationships with computers. Levy says that he dedicated his book “to ‘Anthony’ and all the other ‘Anthonys’ before and since of both sexes, to all those who feel lost and hopeless without relationships, to let them know there will come a time when they can form relationships with robots.”
Whether those bonds are emotionally healthy, however, is debatable. As Turkle puts it: “If you are lonely but afraid of intimacy, relationships with machines can enable you to be a loner yet never alone, give you the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship. There is nothing to celebrate here. To me, the seductiveness of relationships with robots speaks to what we are not getting from people.”
Instead of throwing robots at social problems, Turkle feels humans should do the job. “What people like Anthony need are experiences that will increase their repertoire for dealing with the complexity and challenges of relationships with people,” she explains. Levy contends that there are not going to be enough people to handle social concerns such as loneliness or care for the elderly, but Turkle dismisses the idea: “If we paid people to take care of the elderly in the way we invested in other things, this wouldn’t be an issue.”
Both Fisher and Turkle find the idea of legal human-robot marriages ridiculous. But Levy counters that “if you went back 100 years, if you proposed the idea that men would be marrying men, you’d be locked up in the loony bin. And it was only in the second half of the 20th century that you had the U.S. federal government repealing laws in about 12 states that said marriage across racial boundaries was illegal. That’s how much the nature of marriage has changed.”
As to what Levy’s wife thinks, he laughs: “She was totally skeptical of the idea that humans would fall in love with robots. She’s still fairly skeptical.” A reasonable reaction—then again, a Stepford wife with contrariness programmed into her would say that, too.
This article was originally published with the title Not Tonight, Dear, I Have to Reboot.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
5 Comments
Add CommentI'm pretty sure that since the robots don't have the hormones and chemical interactions that real humans have, that this will be limited to a few defective individuals that are prone to mental illness. Besides, after Star Trek made it fasionable to have sex with nonhumans, why not just find a nice sheep or goat. About the same as a robot but warmer. Sick is sick people! Wouldn't it be better to get them some mental health assistance?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI don't think that condemning the idea as "sick" (whatever that means) is a particularly productive way to discuss this topic.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt has already been noted in this article that the the drives we feel to procreate and form attachments do not require a human to stimulate them ie romantic movies, stories etc, your relationship with your pet or even your car.
Given sufficiently advanced levels of simulation of human responses and body forms I think it isn't particularly far fetched that people would form strong relationships with a robot. Even to the point of wanting to formalize this relationship with a ceremony similar to marriage.
I mean we're not talking about humping C-3PO here.
Anyone who finds this idea intriguing should read Tanith Lee's 1981 novel "The Silver Metal Lover"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this[b]It has already been noted in this article that the the drives we feel to procreate and form attachments do not require a human to stimulate them ie romantic movies, stories etc, your relationship with your pet or even your car.[/b]
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLikewise, conditions stimulating an organism's reflexive self-defense responses are not necessary in order for me to want to punch someone in the face - but punching someone in the face for any reason not related to self-defense is not automatically acceptable because of that.
Because a bunch of social failures can't find a way to get laid by a free-thinking organism of their own species, they want to create a substitute that behaves exactly the way it's told to. Go ahead and do so, but I would have to agree with the poster who says these people are mentally unhealthy.
--
Edited by Red Fault at 03/05/2008 12:58 PM
I think that perhaps the example of punching someone in the face may not be as good as it seems on the surface. As there are situations where this behavior is acceptable, boxing and similar sports in particular.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo, maybe the sort of physical relationships discussed in this article would be acceptable under certain situations and not others. It could be that forming emotional attachments would be considered as much bad form as boxers developing grudges that they act on outside of the ring.
However, in looking to the future, contemplation of the possibilities has to include the question of: at what point does an artificial being become a real person, and if that line is crossed, do we have the right to curtail the freedoms of that being if it wants to form relationships of the kind that we would recognize as romantic?