Deconstruction of Isaac Asimov is wrong !!!

Isaac Asimov

     As a young lad I read many of Isaac Asimov's books. Those in this twenty-first century who have not read his words are missing out on an experience that is hard to describe. It is  intellectual and adventurous and a fun treat! His writings are like your favourite meal or drink, they never age. He never insults the reader as he weaves his magic with mere words. His stories are brilliantly conceived with many endearing characters you come to care about.

He wrote more than 500 books on a great number of subjects. He wrote about astronomy, space travel, science, biology, physics, science fiction and religion. He was truly a renaissance man!!

     Other science fiction writers would ask him to help them clear up any scientific questions. At an early age he was tired of those stories that were written about robots. These stories would always go along the same predictable plot, person creates a machine with intelligence and the machine turns against the creator. Asimov recognized this as the Frankenstein story. Before I go on I want to tip my hat to Mary Shelley for her well written and during tale. The many movies that have come out in our modern era are great fun to watch but are never true to her original work. I hope everyone reading these words has the chance to read her work. It is well worth the and effort.

     Asimov wrote his stories which made the creation, the robot, more as a benefit and friend to mankind. Since most complex machinery has safeguards, Asimov thought that the most complex machines created should also have some kind of control. He explored this idea in several stories. His now famous and often referred to, Three Laws of Robotics were the natural conclusion of this line of reasoning. Let us examine them now.

                    

#1     A robot may not injure a human Being, or through inaction,  allow a human being to come to harm.

#2     A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first law.

#3     A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law.

                                                                                                   Handbook of Robotics

   56th Edition 2058

      Simple enough at first sight , but a bit of analysis will show how complicated they really are. The first law makes supreme sense. A robot of complex construction, intelligent, very strong, ambulatory and independent cannot be allowed to hurt its creator. Without this law the robots, the children of mankind's collective genius, will never be able to integrate into our society. In order for them to be effective they must be invisible, in the sense that humans will not have to look over their shoulders concerned about what they will do. Asimov constructed the laws as a cascading logical sequence. One law leads to the next. They build a potential that guides the robot properly.

     The second law is to me a bit problematic. I am a daily witness to how , humans do not always reach for their highest potential. Humanity, the apex of evolution still makes dubious choices. They act like they are mercifully devoid of the vestiges of intelligence. So when a robot MUST obey the orders given to it by a human being, I shudder. What are those individuals who are not competent giving orders to a robot to do ??? As it stands I will have to leave it but I think it deserves a second and third look.

    The third law makes the most sublime sense. A robot must protect itself, so long as such protection do not conflict with the first and second law. It will most likely incorporate very complex and costly components and highly sophisticated programming. To be destroyed or ever abused would not only be a terrible waste , but a crime.!!

     Now Asimov realized than when you mix humans and robots with the three laws situations arise that are far from ideal. He explored these in some fascinating stories. We are so fortunate that he left us entire books and series of books about robot and human characters interacting with each other.

     I know a very, very long preamble, I must come to the reason for all this fascinating stuff. It seems that over the past few years far too many writers have questioned how applicable the three laws are to the so called real world.

     My biggest problem with anyone questioning Asimov, is that as far as I know, no one, NO ONE, has built a sentient, intelligent, autonomous robot. You will hear a great deal how wonderful artificial intelligence ( I prefer the term Machine Intelligence ) is going to be. These pie in the sky articles are written by persons who do not know what they are taking about. I find it personally nauseating to read these articles. I suspect that not one in a hundred of these authours would be able to pick out a hundred kilo-ohm resistor from a pile of electronic components. I love to labor the point and will say they are talking through their hats. Building robots is very challenging and of course lots of fun. To build a true machine intelligence is still a work in progress. I know for I stand before these challenges daily!!

     I have read, to my disgust, how some people have written that Asimov's three laws are out of date, they cannot possibly be applied, or that the A.I. out there have gone beyond them.

      Now the first group who argue against his laws are talking about the so called autonomous weapons. Created by the minions of the various military groups around the world to destroy their perceived enemies. In reality their devices are not true robots, but I will argue for the sake of clarity and for the sake of sanity. These so called smart bombs violate the first law because they have little or no intelligence and as such are not allowed to make up their non-existent minds. The generals and politicians do not want back talk or this case back code. They want slave soldiers, slave machines, created, designed and programmed to obey, without question, all orders given to them. The first law would nullify these destructive artifacts.

      That is why the first law must be employed in robots. Scientists are trying to ban these weapons, however the back splash is affecting legitimate robot research. I recall my old black and white TV and the Superman serial that ran. The introduction went like this " ......... able to change the course of mighty rivers!!! ". Many of us are unaware that we possess great powers. We may not be able to change the world, but each of us affect those around us. As such if enough good people do the right things an ocean of change can occur!!

     Now the Second Law restricts some of an autonomous robot's actions. The generals hate this law, because even though a robot must obey any order given to it by a human, it must never disobey the First Law. In other words it cannot be ordered to kill a human being. Now to the military mind on this or any other planet with so called intelligent life, what would be the use of that. Spend millions in research and development and it ain't going to kick butt. Hey idiots that is my whole point. Robots to me are the children of humankind's collective genius. I firmly believe that they can help us survive and thrive. To use them for killing is just plain stupid and a complete waste.

      Isaac Asimov saw this even before we had the first personal computer. He has gone well before his time. It saddens and angers me that people attack his well developed ideas. He is not here to defend himself. In my mind's eye I see him formulating and expressing his devastating argument against these people. I am a poor substitute for his wisdom but I could not live with my self if I did not try in my own small way to take up his gauntlet and stand against this seemingly overwhelming tide of ignorance. To do otherwise is not even to be considered. I am firmly in Asimov's vision of the future. It makes more sense and where I want to be. Let Mr. Scott for the USS Enterprise NCC-1701 say to those who dare criticize Isaac Asimov,