Comparative Analysis Five years ago, I watched a classic science-fiction film “Wall-E” (2008), the main character in this movie is a robot which collects trash on the abandoned earth in the future. Although it follows the order by human engaging the boring task day by day, it saves the global environment with its strong emotion when it finds the green plant. Most interesting, Wall-E also falls in love with EVE at the end of this movie.
Even the fantasy plot is merely happen in the film, currently, with the development of technology, more and more humanoid robots are beginning to work in our realistic world as the assistants in many fields. From “Humanoid Robotics: Ethical Considerations” to “My Friend the Robot,” both of this two articles focus on the ethical decisions on the robots, although robots become more autonomous and intelligent, they cannot and will not ever replace humans. People need to find ways to ensure that they are better equipped to make moral judgments.
By comparing with two articles that talk about this topic, we can confirm the different and similar points between these two articles. In the article “Humanoid Robotics: Ethical Considerations,” published on the Idaho National Laboratory website on May 30, 2006, David Bruemmer emphasizes the importance of technological development and regulation in the field of giving robots some motivational system. Following the development of science and technology, artificial intelligence is extensively used in many aspects.
Therefore, human improving humanoids via intelligence is a trend in currently. Likewise, the author also quotes the best-known set of guidelines for robo-ethics is the “three laws of robotics” coined by Isaac Asimov who is a science-fiction writer, in order to illustrate the high-level rules are simply impracticable from a software engineering perspective. Bruemmer uses the ethical rules to measure whether giving robots intelligence or not, and gets a conclusion that the technology has driven mankind’s progress, but each new advance has posed troubling new questions.
Autonomous machines are different, the sooner the problems of moral agency they raise are dealt with, the easier it will be for mankind to enjoy the benefits that they will undoubtedly bring. Another article “My Friend the Robots,” published on the times higher education website on Feb. 16, 2007 in London. Kathleen Richardson talks about how the companion robots benefit people, especially for the elder. She cites many different kinds of robots which were made before as examples to demonstrate that the robots are useful in people’s life.
In addition, Richardson reminds people to realize the relationship between human and robots, and gives robots more status. Ultimately, the robots made in the future do their best to help people and interact harmoniously coexistence with people. Bruemmer is a vice president in the company called 5D. His major work concentrates on the development of intelligent robots. Kathleen Richardson’s research focuses on the field of therapeutic assistance for children and elders; she obtains PhD in the Department of Social Anthropology.
Although their majors are both to research and develop robots, they work in different fields. Bruemmer focuses on the application of robots in the field of business, but Richardson pays more attention to the development of robots in society. According to their different fields of research, Bruemmer and Richardson’s theses are not similar. Bruemmer suggests people should not doubt and stagnate improving the emotion with humanoids even if they are worried about humanoids replacing human and taking over the world, because humanoids are the products of our own minds and hands.
Richardson talks about how the companion robots benefit the elderly, and reminds people to realize the relationship between human and humanoids, in order to give robots more status as equal as human. In the aspect of audience, both Bruemmer and Richardson target the people who focus on the development of humanoid robots or engagement in the field of scientific research. However, Bruemmer also writes for many software engineers. Richardson’s article is issued on the education website, so her audiences are, including students, social anthropologists and the public.
Bruemmer and Richardson both support the development of humanoid robots with intelligence and emotion, but they have different viewpoints. In Bruemmer’s article, he says, “We cannot shirk responsibility by calling the future inevitable. It is difficult to direct a snowball as it careens down the slope (2006). ” Bruemmer explains the intelligent robots represent the high technology and the social progress, but nurture and monitor the improvement of humanoids is a great challenge, even it will be a long-term goal. While, Richardson writes her article by personal emotions.
She expects companion robots can solve the problem of elderly alienation. For example, in her article, Richardson asks many questions about the relationship between human and robots. At the end of her article, she gives her main point, “In the absence of a human-centred vision, the technology’s benefits to the elderly will be uncertain and limited (2007). ” Through this comparison, although Bruemmer and Richardson have different background and different groups of audience, both of them support the development of humanoid robots with intelligence and emotion.
In addition, Bruemmer emphasizes the importance of technological development and regulation in the field of giving robots some motivational system, he believes that nurturing and monitoring the improvement of humanoids is a great challenge. Richardson talks about how the companion robots benefit people, especially for the elderly. Finally, she concerns about human-centred in order to remind people of realizing the relationship between human and robots, and giving robots more status. Compared with these two articles, Richardson’s article is more effective than Bruemmer’s, because her topic is closer to the public.
Also, she uses more examples in her article to let reader understand easier, rather than much professional words. Richardson writes her article with personal emotion, it can make audience feel empathy while reading. Obviously, the audiences prefer to accept Richardson’s article. References Bruemmer, D. (2006). Humanoid Robotics: Ethical Considerations. The Idaho National Laboratory. Retrieved from https://www. inl. gov/humanoidrobotics/ethicalconsiderations. shtml Richardson, K. (2007). My Friend the Robot. The Times (London). Retrieved from http://www. timeshighereducation. co. uk
