2nd Year - BS Electronics Engineering Philosophical Anthropology (PHIN102)

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 4

HENDREX JOHN A.

OLAVIAGA
2nd Year - BS Electronics Engineering
Philosophical Anthropology (PHIN102)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
ss
Instructions: Choose three (3) questions from pages 160 - 161 of our textbook Roots
of Wisdom: A Tapestry of Philosophical Traditions (Sixth Edition) by Helen Buss
Mitchell.

Answer the questions in not less than five (5) sentences each.

1. What if your mother became your father or your father became your
mother through transsexual surgery. Could you continue to accept loving
parenting even if the external appearance of your parents changed?
Assume that the personality and approach of your parents will not
change, only his or her appearance and social role.

To contextualize, parenthood is not really defined by gender or


even by sexual orientation of someone. With all facts, someone can still
be considered as a parent despite not being directly related biologically
to their child. Considering what is happening in the status quo, we can
really observe a lot of broken relationships and families where children
often grow up without really getting to know their biological parents.
But the thing here is that, despite growing up with someone else, the
value and love from these non-biological parents are still fulfilled and
respected. This context includes the differences in manners, the way
they treat children, and physical appearances. Now, following this
context, because it is possible to feel the love of a parent from someone
who’s not even related to you and have extremely different views and
beliefs from you, therefore what makes someone a parent is not really
define by what they are physically but rather the values and love they
can offer to their child. This leads me to my point as to why the love and
value of parenting is not really affected by gender roles, appearances,
and whatnot. And why would I still accept my parents the same way
even if they switch gender roles.
To discuss the question, in this paradigm the situation is that
your parents have undergone surgeries where they switch sexual
orientation and changes in appearances are very evident. Now the
question there is, is that if I would still accept them the same way
before all this happens. I would definitely say yes because of two
reasons. One, They are still my parents regardless of their appearances.
If you are someone like me who grew up with parents who’s not really
blood related to you, then you will understand why I respect them more
than I respect anybody else. They are basically the reason why I was
HENDREX JOHN A. OLAVIAGA
2nd Year - BS Electronics Engineering
Philosophical Anthropology (PHIN102)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
able to enjoy and appreciate life the way it has to be. They are my
driving force to continue despite all the obstacles and challenges
because I wouldn’t even be in this situation if it’s not because of them.
Yes this sounds cliche, but we have to understand that if we truly and
genuinely love someone, regardless of it’s appearances, the feeling
would still be the same. Second, If the personality, manners, and any
personal traits are still the same then I don’t see any reason at all to
unlove them. We have to understand that the very reason why we love
our parents is simply because of the values, love, and support that they
actually give to us and not really because they look like a father and a
mother. Two of the same sex can still be a parent without any problem.
For me personally, parenting is a choice and a commitment. No matter
how much you change your appearance, if you are an irresponsible
parent, you would still be the same. So it wouldn’t really matter to me.
Values and love are the most important things in the world.
Appearances are just subjective facts that we can use to judge or
compliment something externally but nothing beats what the inside
can give.

2. If we succeed in building a very sophisticated android who seems human


in most ways, should that android have the same legal and social rights as
we do? Why, or why not?

To answer the question we first need to define what kind of


androids are these. Do they have feelings, values, do they fall in love, etc.
Assuming that these androids are very human-like to the extent that
the only difference between the two is that humans have blood and
organs but these androids only have batteries and wires. I still don’t
think that these androids should have the same legal and social rights
as ours. On the other hand, I believe that we shall impose legal and
social rules or standards for these androids to follow since human-like
characteristics and reasoning in artificial intelligence might be
detrimental to human existence in the long run. More on that as I
continue with my claim.
Artificial intelligence is a very broad topic to tackle especially in
the status quo where it is very much evident that we are not far from
actually developing a human-like machine that can be used for various
personal and social purposes. The key concept here is that AI are
machines that are developed by humans. Equipped with programs and
structures that are built for a purpose. Now if we try to consider a world
HENDREX JOHN A. OLAVIAGA
2nd Year - BS Electronics Engineering
Philosophical Anthropology (PHIN102)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
where humans and androids live together in a specific area for
example, with the same rights and purposes in the society, this would
likely diminish the very purposes of humans to live. Why? Simply
because these androids would now be considered as a part of the social
system, contributing to social rights such as voting, leading, jobs, and
lists goes on. This is very detrimental since we are limiting the freedom
of our people to actually live their life the way it has to be since there is
no doubt that these androids can do pretty much everything better
than we humans are capable of doing. Jobs would be rounded with
robots, and the people in lower class levels will be left with not enough
funds to live. If this continues, considering that almost 60% of the
world’s human population are experiencing poverty, 60% of human
lives would immediately be put in jeopardy. To extend the case, I will
tell you why we should limit Artificial Intelligence and why we should
impose legal standards directly for the production of such machines. AI
is very dependent on what the developers want for this machine. Is this
for war, household, janitors, etc. The very fact that the capabilities of
such machines lies within our grasp is very detrimental to humanity
simply because of two reasons. One, selfish acts. If we take a look at our
current status quo, we can really observe how different countries tend
to compete with each other. If human-like androids are already existent,
it’s not far from reality that some country or developers would use this
technology for defense mechanisms, basically strengthening the risk of
a possible another world war. Second, Human purpose. The very reason
why we exist is because we have a purpose. If we try to treat androids
the same as we do to humans, then we are considering these machines
as the new era of humanity in our world. It is not impossible that once
this happens, everything will be dependent on artificial intelligence to
the extent that we don’t really need humans to exist anymore.
Everything will be run by androids and nothing will be left to us but our
mere existence.
To clarify my claim, I'm not saying that we should refrain from
striving for the development of artificial intelligence since as a future
Electronics engineer, it is our job to create and develop technologies
that can be beneficial to the people and society in the long run. The
thing here is that we should never treat such machines the same way
as we treat our people. We are built differently and we have a purpose
that we only humans should fulfill.
HENDREX JOHN A. OLAVIAGA
2nd Year - BS Electronics Engineering
Philosophical Anthropology (PHIN102)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
3. Suppose you are despondent and depressed. You dial up a “hotline” on
your computer and have an extended conversation with a counselor, after
which you feel much better. Does it matter if you later learn you were
conversing with the program PC Therapist III?

To answer the question directly, I would say that it doesn't really


matter. Whoever it is I talked to, it doesn’t matter. The very fact that I
was able to feel better, understand the situation, feel the care and
attention that seemed like I couldn’t find before the conversation
happened is more than enough already to say that I am indeed
thankful that it was this hotline that I dialed out.
People might say that Artificial Intelligence in such hotlines for
depressed people like such are very disrespectful and risky, well I beg to
disagree. As a specialized student in electronics and artificial
intelligence development, I understand the risk of using such devices
for this matter but we also have to understand that Artificial
intelligence or programs like the one mentioned in the question if done
and built correctly can be very reliable consistently. Why? Simply
because these machines are built for the sole purpose of answering
calls from mentally vulnerable people, therefore it can masterfully
understand the situation faster than what a normal person would.
Because it is built for this purpose alone, all programs and scripts
inputted in this machine are like hundreds of contents and facts
combined from different psychology textbooks. That’s how reliable an
artificial intelligence can be. Now going back to the context of the
question, I would really say no. It would not matter whether it is an AI or
a real person. It’s like my mother underwent an operation using an
artificial intelligence and was fully healed. Would it still matter that it
was done by robots and not humans? For me, no. Because I believe that
there are times that AI are more soft and humane to talk to, unlike
humans who tend to be more disorganized and judgemental at times.
Human mental stability is a very serious matter, I would say that
before a machine or a program can be released for public use for
example, it has already undergone various tests meaning it’s not just
built so that people don’t have to do it anymore. We have to understand
that AI is used for something because it can do the job effectively in a
much more consistent manner. Basically helping more people in the
long run.

You might also like