Study Shows Babies Think Friendly Robots Are Sentient 159
seanonymous writes "A study from University of Washington claims that babies think robots are human, so long as the robots are friendly. No word on what evil robots are thought to be. From the article: 'At 18 months old, babies have begun to make conscious delineations between sentient beings and inanimate objects. But as robots get more and more advanced, those decisions may become harder to make. What causes a baby to decide a robot is more than bits of metal? As it turns out, it takes more than humanoid looks — babies rely on social interaction to make that call.'"
How does this differ between humans and animals? (Score:4, Insightful)
Do they think the dog is sentient?
Correction (Score:5, Insightful)
Correction: Should read "Babies behave towards things the same way they observed adults behaving towards them". The babies in the study didn't behave as if the robots were sentient unless they had watched an adult treat the robot as if it were sentient. Only if they watched an adult 'play' with the robot like a human child did the babies respond as if the robot were alive, even though the robot was programmed with the exact same movements in both set ups. This says a lot more about how children learn from adults than it does about how children perceive robots.
Re:Exactly (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. And likewise there's no genetic reason for babies to understand the concept of robots.
The whole question seems silly. Considering a decently life-like device, the wiser and more perceptive (read: older) a human needs to be to distinguish robotic from organic.
I have a 2yr old... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How does this differ between humans and animals (Score:3, Insightful)
depends on your definition of sentience. By the wikipedia definition for example I'd say dogs are sentient.
from wikipedia...
"Sentience is the ability to feel or perceive. The term is used in science and philosophy, and in the study of artificial intelligence. Sentience is used in the study of consciousness to describe the ability to have sensations or experiences, known to Western philosophers as "qualia""
Re:How does this differ between humans and animals (Score:1, Insightful)
That's okay, we'll give you a few minutes to look up the meaning of the word sentient. If you're more logically oriented, here's a hint: sentience != sapience.
And as far as pavlovian response (aka classical conditioning) goes, that just happens to play a very large role in human development. It's when something doesn't learn from repetition that there's a good chance of no intelligence. Claiming that the presence of learning in response to repetition isn't intelligence, isn't very intelligent.
My CAPCHA word is: realize. I found that somewhat relevant.
Re:what about Superman, Santa, Easter Bunny..? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Are babies sentient? (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you thinking Sapient?
Sapient, Sentient, Conscious and Self-Aware aren't all the same?
I'd say: Babies are Sentient (Can feel and perceive), Marginally Sapient (can make basic judgments only), Conscious (aware that stuff is going on[when they're, you know, awake]) and not very self-aware (not much identity of self)
Regarding the dog conversation above, I dont think this is much different than a dog. I heard a line once "A kid is like a dog that grows up and learns how to talk".
(don't hate me, kids are cool)
The robot? It can perceive, it can act based on stimulus. Feel?- No. Sentient no not really. Then none of the other things either.
I'm not sure the Babies are human and therefore have human intelligence makes sense. A person in a persistent vegetative state is human, but not sentient.