Yeah we would, it’s the end product not the production that defines it. Same way we refer to cars as cars even tho there’s been robots building them for decades.
When robots create robots, we would call them as 'robots' too. By the same logic if God created us, robots are humans according to God.
Submitted 1 month ago by pocker_machine@lemmy.world to showerthoughts@lemmy.world
Comments
dumbass@leminal.space 1 month ago
pocker_machine@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I understand we would. I just left a shower thought on the possibility that an entity, if exists, called God would. Not trying to be pedantic here, just an amusing thought. 🙂
squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That point quickly devolves into “What would a hypothetical being that’s completely different from us and not knowable do?”
Or to put it differently: “What would something we can’t understand be like?”
It’s kind of a moot question to ask since the question already defines that there is no answer.
dumbass@leminal.space 1 month ago
Sall good, I was just stoned replying.
yaroto98@lemmy.world 1 month ago
No, then we’d be called gods and so would the robots.
pocker_machine@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Interesting
Sergio@piefed.social 1 month ago
I kinda like this one. it's got a "hidden step" in which if humans are created by gods, we are robots to those gods.
pocker_machine@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Yes exactly
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 1 month ago
There’s no “God”. So, this doesn’t work at all.
pocker_machine@lemmy.world 1 month ago
I’m not saying there is one. It’s just a thought experiment
MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Then you should’ve watched your wording. Either way… there is no thing as a “God”.
remon@ani.social 1 month ago
We would call it a robot if it is a robot. Doesn’t matter how it was made. So really there is no logic that supports the 2nd statement.