Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!apple!vsi1!wyse!mips!prls!philabs!linus!mbunix!bwk From: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Robot pain Summary: On sensing and processing pain signals. Keywords: Sensing mechanical stress and systemic damage, Fire Alarms Message-ID: <46620@linus.UUCP> Date: 18 Mar 89 14:34:29 GMT References: <3369@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu> <330@esosun.UUCP> <1989Mar4.152943.10902@cs.rochester.edu> <337@skye.ed.ac.uk> Sender: news@linus.UUCP Reply-To: bwk@mbunix (Barry Kort) Organization: Garden Golems, Inc., Norbert, WI Lines: 21 In article <337@skye.ed.ac.uk> jeff@aiai.UUCP (Jeff Dalton) writes: > Maybe, when we know a lot more about such robots (assuming they're > possible at all) and about ourselves, it will be pretty clear that > that robot does feel pain. But maybe it will instead be clear that > it's just programmed to behave as if it feels pain. How do you know > it won't turn out that way? Perhaps it would help if we define pain. The robot has a mechanical body, which it relies on for locomotion and interaction with the environmental surround. Preservation of the functional integrity of that mechanical body is a priority if the robot is to pursue goals which depend on that body. Therefore, the robot needs to be informed of any danger or damage to its pieceparts. Mechanical stress sensors report such information, and the robot can act to moderate or ameliorate conditions which endanger it's long-term corporeal well-being. In humans, we call such information "pain". In robots we can choose to call it what we like, but functionally it serves the same purpose. --Barry Kort