WEBVTT - Teaching Robots to Love

0:00:03.120 --> 0:00:06.000
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from how Stuff

0:00:06.040 --> 0:00:14.360
<v Speaker 1>Works dot com. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind.

0:00:14.400 --> 0:00:16.920
<v Speaker 1>My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Julie Douglas. Julie.

0:00:17.040 --> 0:00:21.080
<v Speaker 1>Two questions. First of all, should humans love their technology?

0:00:21.239 --> 0:00:27.320
<v Speaker 1>That's the first question. Second question, should technology love humans? Okay, um,

0:00:27.360 --> 0:00:29.880
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna say yes and yes because I think that

0:00:29.960 --> 0:00:35.120
<v Speaker 1>you can't stop love in any form, right, yeah, yeah,

0:00:35.159 --> 0:00:36.920
<v Speaker 1>I think that we and I think we we'll maybe

0:00:37.000 --> 0:00:39.239
<v Speaker 1>make this case today. I don't know, or we'll just

0:00:39.320 --> 0:00:42.200
<v Speaker 1>muddle the whole concept of love. But I do think

0:00:42.240 --> 0:00:44.920
<v Speaker 1>that we can't help but to to love our technology

0:00:44.920 --> 0:00:48.760
<v Speaker 1>and be attached to it, and eventually that will become

0:00:48.800 --> 0:00:51.839
<v Speaker 1>this idea that robots will be programmed to love us

0:00:51.840 --> 0:00:56.120
<v Speaker 1>because we just love love. Well, that that sounds sweet.

0:00:56.160 --> 0:00:59.000
<v Speaker 1>But I think you can stop love. I think love

0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:02.520
<v Speaker 1>is a very stoppable force. I think it's a virus. Yeah,

0:01:02.640 --> 0:01:05.920
<v Speaker 1>it persists. The viruses are stoppable, some of them. So

0:01:06.040 --> 0:01:10.120
<v Speaker 1>if we have the ability to to stop some forms

0:01:10.160 --> 0:01:11.800
<v Speaker 1>of love in their tracks. Because the first thing we

0:01:11.840 --> 0:01:14.160
<v Speaker 1>need to discuss is, of course, the nature of love.

0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:17.880
<v Speaker 1>What is love? Because love is a is just a

0:01:17.959 --> 0:01:20.560
<v Speaker 1>word like love is a big tent that encompasses a

0:01:20.640 --> 0:01:23.800
<v Speaker 1>lot of things. I mean, because you know, obviously there's

0:01:23.840 --> 0:01:26.240
<v Speaker 1>a loved one feels for one's wife, there's a loved

0:01:26.240 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 1>one feels for one's child. There's the love one feels

0:01:29.760 --> 0:01:34.000
<v Speaker 1>for like a really good sandwich, And these are vastly

0:01:34.160 --> 0:01:38.679
<v Speaker 1>different emotional states. Oh yeah, I think that Aristotle had

0:01:38.880 --> 0:01:41.959
<v Speaker 1>a sandwich love category. Yeah. Yeah. You can kill a

0:01:42.000 --> 0:01:43.920
<v Speaker 1>love for a sandwich if you just say, oh, well

0:01:43.959 --> 0:01:46.240
<v Speaker 1>that actually that sandwich isn't very good for you, or

0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:49.560
<v Speaker 1>those ingredients are really foul, or that restaurant got a

0:01:49.560 --> 0:01:51.960
<v Speaker 1>really crippling and a health rating. Uh, And then you

0:01:52.040 --> 0:01:54.040
<v Speaker 1>might be, oh, well, maybe I don't love this sandwich

0:01:54.120 --> 0:01:56.520
<v Speaker 1>is much, or you could over indulge in the sandwich.

0:01:56.880 --> 0:01:59.720
<v Speaker 1>Whereas it's harder to kill the love safe for you know,

0:01:59.760 --> 0:02:02.200
<v Speaker 1>for a spouse or a child or something. Just because

0:02:02.240 --> 0:02:04.200
<v Speaker 1>someone says, well, that kid's hair is a little weird.

0:02:04.240 --> 0:02:06.320
<v Speaker 1>You're not gonna be like, oh well, okay, love removed

0:02:07.480 --> 0:02:11.840
<v Speaker 1>generally generally speaking, sometimes how bad the hair is. Yeah, um,

0:02:11.960 --> 0:02:14.440
<v Speaker 1>did you know that what is love? Was the most

0:02:14.480 --> 0:02:17.919
<v Speaker 1>searched phrase on Google in two thousand and twelve. Really,

0:02:18.320 --> 0:02:19.959
<v Speaker 1>people want to know, were they looking for that song?

0:02:20.760 --> 0:02:24.760
<v Speaker 1>Isn't that what is love? Baby don't hurt? That song?

0:02:24.919 --> 0:02:28.679
<v Speaker 1>That what keeps saying it baby don't hurt me? Mm hmm,

0:02:28.840 --> 0:02:31.560
<v Speaker 1>that's all I know. Yeah, No, I don't think it

0:02:31.600 --> 0:02:33.680
<v Speaker 1>was that song, but I'm glad that we got to

0:02:33.800 --> 0:02:36.440
<v Speaker 1>get you. That might have been the searches. We're just

0:02:36.440 --> 0:02:40.280
<v Speaker 1>looking for those lyrics. It's possible, It's possible. But well, this,

0:02:40.280 --> 0:02:43.440
<v Speaker 1>this idea that people are searching for the meaning of

0:02:43.680 --> 0:02:48.600
<v Speaker 1>love had one Guardian article called what is Love talked

0:02:48.639 --> 0:02:52.200
<v Speaker 1>to several different experts about their take on love, which

0:02:52.240 --> 0:02:55.639
<v Speaker 1>was sort of interesting because again, here's this big, huge

0:02:55.680 --> 0:02:58.959
<v Speaker 1>concept that has so many different meanings and so many

0:02:58.960 --> 0:03:01.600
<v Speaker 1>different categories, and to the point where the word itself

0:03:01.720 --> 0:03:05.440
<v Speaker 1>tends to lose meaning. You know, like when someone says, oh,

0:03:05.480 --> 0:03:08.760
<v Speaker 1>I love something, it almost is a pointless thing to

0:03:08.840 --> 0:03:12.560
<v Speaker 1>say because it's such an overused word that it we've

0:03:12.600 --> 0:03:15.799
<v Speaker 1>we've just stripped it of all its power. That is true.

0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:18.239
<v Speaker 1>I was just thinking that with my daughter, I don't

0:03:18.280 --> 0:03:21.440
<v Speaker 1>like her to say the word hate. I oftentimes will say,

0:03:21.560 --> 0:03:23.960
<v Speaker 1>do you truly hate that? You know? Is it just

0:03:24.040 --> 0:03:27.200
<v Speaker 1>that you dislike it? Because that's a word that's very strong.

0:03:27.440 --> 0:03:30.040
<v Speaker 1>But I never say do you really love that? Are

0:03:30.040 --> 0:03:34.080
<v Speaker 1>you sure you love that? Because there's so much positivity

0:03:34.120 --> 0:03:39.400
<v Speaker 1>associated with it. Uh. Theoretical physicist and science writer Jim

0:03:39.400 --> 0:03:43.000
<v Speaker 1>Al Khalil had said that while lust is a temporary,

0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:47.120
<v Speaker 1>passionate sexual desire involving the increased release of chemicals like

0:03:47.200 --> 0:03:51.120
<v Speaker 1>testosterone and estrogen, he says that in true love or attachment,

0:03:51.160 --> 0:03:53.280
<v Speaker 1>in bonding, the brain can release a whole set of

0:03:53.320 --> 0:03:59.520
<v Speaker 1>chemicals pheromones, dopamine, nor epinephrin, UH, serotonin, oxytocin, embasso, pressant. So,

0:03:59.560 --> 0:04:02.400
<v Speaker 1>he says, from an evolutionary perspective, love can be viewed

0:04:02.520 --> 0:04:05.640
<v Speaker 1>as a survival tool, a mechanism that we evolve to

0:04:05.640 --> 0:04:09.880
<v Speaker 1>promote long term relationships, mutual defense and parental support of children,

0:04:09.960 --> 0:04:13.880
<v Speaker 1>and to promote feelings of safe safety insecurity. Yeah. So

0:04:13.920 --> 0:04:17.120
<v Speaker 1>it's basically a chemical bond to things that enable us

0:04:17.160 --> 0:04:20.880
<v Speaker 1>to better perform our genetic mission as organisms. There are

0:04:20.960 --> 0:04:23.680
<v Speaker 1>several different versions of love. They're laid out in this

0:04:23.920 --> 0:04:28.000
<v Speaker 1>this particular article. For instance, there's philia, the deep non

0:04:28.120 --> 0:04:32.520
<v Speaker 1>sexual intimacy between close friends or family members or soldiers

0:04:32.520 --> 0:04:35.600
<v Speaker 1>in the trench. You know, it's uh, it's this this

0:04:35.720 --> 0:04:39.040
<v Speaker 1>bond of love that's you know, not sexual, not romantic,

0:04:39.080 --> 0:04:42.440
<v Speaker 1>but it's it's you know, it's your your your bros

0:04:42.560 --> 0:04:46.240
<v Speaker 1>kind of you know kind of love, bras bras bra love.

0:04:46.720 --> 0:04:50.240
<v Speaker 1>I guess, Okay, Yeah, then there's a there's a lotus

0:04:50.480 --> 0:04:54.080
<v Speaker 1>playful affection that found in fooling around or flirting. Now

0:04:54.120 --> 0:04:57.159
<v Speaker 1>this one is I guess a little harder to like

0:04:57.279 --> 0:04:58.760
<v Speaker 1>nail that. I mean, I guess I can think of

0:04:58.920 --> 0:05:01.120
<v Speaker 1>some past example to that, you know, where you're kind

0:05:01.160 --> 0:05:04.400
<v Speaker 1>of like flirty with somebody, but you're not really going

0:05:04.480 --> 0:05:07.039
<v Speaker 1>after them per se. You know that it doesn't seem

0:05:07.040 --> 0:05:08.920
<v Speaker 1>to be much to that one, right, because that's such

0:05:08.920 --> 0:05:11.640
<v Speaker 1>an ephemeral stage. Yeah, it's kind of like like that

0:05:11.680 --> 0:05:13.920
<v Speaker 1>one's just like I mean, that one can be killed

0:05:13.920 --> 0:05:16.040
<v Speaker 1>by the sobering up a bit. I think, you know,

0:05:16.160 --> 0:05:19.160
<v Speaker 1>like that's not it's barely love. It seems a little

0:05:19.200 --> 0:05:21.440
<v Speaker 1>cheap to even classify it as a form of love,

0:05:21.520 --> 0:05:25.360
<v Speaker 1>doesn't it. Yeah, then there's a pragma, the mature love

0:05:25.360 --> 0:05:27.960
<v Speaker 1>that develops over a long period of time between long

0:05:28.080 --> 0:05:31.479
<v Speaker 1>term couples. Uh. And this and this is really you know,

0:05:31.520 --> 0:05:33.640
<v Speaker 1>when people talk about all that deep love that grows

0:05:33.680 --> 0:05:36.800
<v Speaker 1>out of relationship because the relationship maybe may begin with

0:05:36.960 --> 0:05:39.400
<v Speaker 1>lust or even this lootus thing we're talking about, or

0:05:39.400 --> 0:05:42.200
<v Speaker 1>it may be begin with philia, but over time it

0:05:42.240 --> 0:05:46.320
<v Speaker 1>develops into this strong bond, this bond where it's it's

0:05:46.400 --> 0:05:48.640
<v Speaker 1>built over time and in a way that it just

0:05:48.680 --> 0:05:51.680
<v Speaker 1>can't be uh, you know, pulled off a shelf, and

0:05:51.880 --> 0:05:56.200
<v Speaker 1>it involves just a lot of goodwill towards another person.

0:05:56.279 --> 0:05:59.479
<v Speaker 1>It's like wanting the best for someone regardless of the cost.

0:05:59.680 --> 0:06:02.280
<v Speaker 1>So you might not have a huge surge in dopamine

0:06:02.560 --> 0:06:06.560
<v Speaker 1>or vasopressin um or even oxytocin, but it's there. It's

0:06:06.560 --> 0:06:09.400
<v Speaker 1>still you know, from from a chemical level, is still

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:12.200
<v Speaker 1>sort of running behind the scenes. Uh. Then there's a

0:06:12.200 --> 0:06:16.440
<v Speaker 1>cape the more generalized love that I remember hearing a

0:06:16.440 --> 0:06:18.240
<v Speaker 1>lot about in church. That's kind of like this sort

0:06:18.240 --> 0:06:21.440
<v Speaker 1>of universal love love everybody, love your neighbor, right, even

0:06:21.480 --> 0:06:24.320
<v Speaker 1>if it doesn't seem practical. Uh, it's just kind of

0:06:24.320 --> 0:06:28.680
<v Speaker 1>an idealized, good natured, be cool of everyone, which you know,

0:06:29.400 --> 0:06:30.720
<v Speaker 1>there is a good, good way to look at the

0:06:30.720 --> 0:06:32.360
<v Speaker 1>world if you can, if you can do it, Yeah,

0:06:32.400 --> 0:06:34.880
<v Speaker 1>it's kind of the seventies love hug. Then there is

0:06:34.960 --> 0:06:40.400
<v Speaker 1>self love or philapia, which is uh is maybe not

0:06:40.440 --> 0:06:42.880
<v Speaker 1>as selfish as it sounds, to be clear, and not

0:06:43.000 --> 0:06:46.040
<v Speaker 1>talking about self love in the sexual context either, no, no, no,

0:06:46.040 --> 0:06:49.799
<v Speaker 1>no no no. Um and uh yeah, this just means uh,

0:06:50.200 --> 0:06:51.560
<v Speaker 1>I mean you can break it down to the fact

0:06:51.600 --> 0:06:52.880
<v Speaker 1>that if you're gonna care about others, you need to

0:06:52.920 --> 0:06:55.040
<v Speaker 1>be able to care about yourself. And then there's of

0:06:55.040 --> 0:06:59.480
<v Speaker 1>course eros sexual passion and desire. Uh. And you know,

0:06:59.600 --> 0:07:02.120
<v Speaker 1>and this is again when people talk about love at

0:07:02.120 --> 0:07:06.160
<v Speaker 1>first sight in terms of a male female romantic relationship,

0:07:06.440 --> 0:07:09.200
<v Speaker 1>this is often what they're actually talking about. I believe

0:07:09.240 --> 0:07:11.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, they're they're talking about arrows. They're talking about

0:07:11.520 --> 0:07:16.160
<v Speaker 1>lust and physical attraction, sexual attraction that may again eventually

0:07:16.240 --> 0:07:18.600
<v Speaker 1>morph into some other form of love or just fall

0:07:18.640 --> 0:07:20.760
<v Speaker 1>off entirely. Yeah. That's what I feel it should be

0:07:20.800 --> 0:07:23.239
<v Speaker 1>astrict like, it's not really a form of love unless

0:07:23.280 --> 0:07:26.960
<v Speaker 1>it becomes philia or pragma, yeah, or some other type

0:07:26.960 --> 0:07:30.800
<v Speaker 1>of love. It's more like a pre love secretion or

0:07:30.840 --> 0:07:33.200
<v Speaker 1>something I don't know, depends that you want to secretion. Yeah,

0:07:34.000 --> 0:07:37.960
<v Speaker 1>Because again we're talking a lot about about hormones flowing

0:07:38.080 --> 0:07:41.320
<v Speaker 1>about about you know, your hormonal response to a potential

0:07:41.360 --> 0:07:45.040
<v Speaker 1>may your hormonal response to um, you know, an infant,

0:07:45.040 --> 0:07:48.560
<v Speaker 1>a child, you know, some sort of offspring. There's there's

0:07:48.560 --> 0:07:50.160
<v Speaker 1>a lot of secreting going on. There is a lot

0:07:50.160 --> 0:07:52.600
<v Speaker 1>of secreting, and you can't really secrete all of those

0:07:52.640 --> 0:07:54.920
<v Speaker 1>for just one person, right, all those different types of love.

0:07:55.200 --> 0:07:57.720
<v Speaker 1>I mean, perhaps there's that one rare person in your

0:07:57.800 --> 0:08:00.760
<v Speaker 1>life that can take on all those roles of love,

0:08:00.880 --> 0:08:04.960
<v Speaker 1>but most likely your family, your friends, your community take

0:08:05.040 --> 0:08:08.360
<v Speaker 1>on all these different aspects of it. In this article,

0:08:08.360 --> 0:08:10.600
<v Speaker 1>they also talk to a philosopher to talk about love

0:08:10.640 --> 0:08:13.760
<v Speaker 1>as a passionate commitment, which really kind of flows in

0:08:13.840 --> 0:08:16.760
<v Speaker 1>with the with the progment we were talking about. Yep,

0:08:16.800 --> 0:08:19.000
<v Speaker 1>it says that we have to This is from Julian Baggini.

0:08:19.040 --> 0:08:21.720
<v Speaker 1>The philosopher said that we need to nurture and develop it,

0:08:21.840 --> 0:08:25.880
<v Speaker 1>even though it usually arrives in our lives unbidden. So

0:08:26.360 --> 0:08:29.480
<v Speaker 1>you take this idea of what love could be, and

0:08:29.520 --> 0:08:33.200
<v Speaker 1>then you begin to think about how we love objects

0:08:33.320 --> 0:08:36.680
<v Speaker 1>or things, and I started to think about this idea

0:08:36.760 --> 0:08:41.960
<v Speaker 1>of apophenia. Now, apophenia is um this sort of unmotivated

0:08:42.000 --> 0:08:47.800
<v Speaker 1>seeing of a connection and a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness.

0:08:47.800 --> 0:08:50.480
<v Speaker 1>That we ascribed to an object, and this was defined

0:08:50.520 --> 0:08:54.120
<v Speaker 1>by German neurologists and psychologist Clause Conrad. So that means

0:08:54.120 --> 0:08:56.200
<v Speaker 1>when you look at an inanimate object and you see

0:08:56.240 --> 0:08:58.480
<v Speaker 1>what looks like a pair of eyes and a nose

0:08:58.520 --> 0:09:00.760
<v Speaker 1>in the mouth, you're unconsciously try to make sense of

0:09:00.760 --> 0:09:03.240
<v Speaker 1>the data in front of you, and you're describing it

0:09:03.280 --> 0:09:06.679
<v Speaker 1>with something that is not what it actually is. Right,

0:09:06.679 --> 0:09:09.720
<v Speaker 1>But it's our human context that we're bringing with us

0:09:09.760 --> 0:09:11.560
<v Speaker 1>all the time, So we can't help to sort of

0:09:11.600 --> 0:09:16.160
<v Speaker 1>project those humanness feelings onto something. Yeah, and um, as

0:09:16.160 --> 0:09:19.679
<v Speaker 1>you've brought up before, the we have this surprising ability

0:09:19.720 --> 0:09:21.920
<v Speaker 1>to see faces like you really you don't have to

0:09:21.960 --> 0:09:24.640
<v Speaker 1>put a smiley face even on something to give it

0:09:24.679 --> 0:09:26.600
<v Speaker 1>this sense of person and give it, I mean we can.

0:09:26.800 --> 0:09:29.200
<v Speaker 1>We We glimpse faces in the clouds, we glimpse faces

0:09:29.240 --> 0:09:31.560
<v Speaker 1>on the moon, and it's all just kind of this, uh,

0:09:31.640 --> 0:09:35.800
<v Speaker 1>you know, this atavistic resonance where our pattern seeking brains

0:09:36.040 --> 0:09:38.360
<v Speaker 1>are looking for things that affect us and what would

0:09:38.360 --> 0:09:40.720
<v Speaker 1>affect us more than it's ap peering into the night

0:09:40.800 --> 0:09:43.440
<v Speaker 1>and seeing the face of man or beast, you know,

0:09:43.760 --> 0:09:46.319
<v Speaker 1>lurching there in the dark, that would be some vital

0:09:46.360 --> 0:09:49.040
<v Speaker 1>information you need to know because friend or foe is

0:09:49.040 --> 0:09:52.839
<v Speaker 1>is right upon you. Yeah. Actually, Sonia Wynn Hager, she's

0:09:52.840 --> 0:09:55.480
<v Speaker 1>an anthropologist at the University of Vienna, said in an

0:09:55.480 --> 0:09:58.840
<v Speaker 1>interview with Life Science that this tendency would have likely

0:09:58.960 --> 0:10:01.520
<v Speaker 1>protected our ants susters and she said taking a bear

0:10:01.559 --> 0:10:05.320
<v Speaker 1>for a stone might be lethal, but the opposite does

0:10:05.400 --> 0:10:07.480
<v Speaker 1>no harm. Yeah, you get down to that whole thing

0:10:07.520 --> 0:10:10.119
<v Speaker 1>of that whole situation with type one and type two airs.

0:10:10.200 --> 0:10:12.800
<v Speaker 1>You know, one air means that, oh, you got me,

0:10:12.840 --> 0:10:14.880
<v Speaker 1>You're not actually a bear trying to eat me, and

0:10:14.920 --> 0:10:18.240
<v Speaker 1>the other air is, um, oh you're actually a bear

0:10:18.320 --> 0:10:21.160
<v Speaker 1>and you just devoured me. So which one, obviously does

0:10:21.240 --> 0:10:23.400
<v Speaker 1>evolution end up selected? Yeah, what's the error that you're

0:10:23.400 --> 0:10:25.640
<v Speaker 1>going to have? And so then you have this apophenia,

0:10:25.760 --> 0:10:29.080
<v Speaker 1>this pattern recognition, seeing patterns everywhere, and you meld that

0:10:29.160 --> 0:10:33.680
<v Speaker 1>together with anthropomorphism, and that's giving human characteristics to animals

0:10:33.679 --> 0:10:39.160
<v Speaker 1>and inanimate objects, and you begin to see that as humans,

0:10:39.200 --> 0:10:42.040
<v Speaker 1>we are going to maybe shovel off some of our

0:10:42.200 --> 0:10:45.839
<v Speaker 1>emotions onto these objects. And I wanted to bring up

0:10:45.960 --> 0:10:50.120
<v Speaker 1>this study that wind Hagger and her colleagues UH conducted

0:10:50.160 --> 0:10:54.079
<v Speaker 1>this this tendency for us to actually personify cars. Now,

0:10:54.280 --> 0:10:59.040
<v Speaker 1>she conducted this this study, and auto never understood. You know,

0:10:59.080 --> 0:11:01.520
<v Speaker 1>it happens all the time, especially in TV shows where

0:11:01.520 --> 0:11:03.959
<v Speaker 1>someone's got a car and it's got this this lady's

0:11:04.040 --> 0:11:08.319
<v Speaker 1>name night Rider. Well but that was what kit I think, yes,

0:11:08.480 --> 0:11:11.960
<v Speaker 1>that that car actually talked and had personality and uh,

0:11:12.040 --> 0:11:13.760
<v Speaker 1>and they loved each other. But it's that that's the

0:11:13.800 --> 0:11:16.240
<v Speaker 1>fantasy of the relationship that some people want to have

0:11:16.360 --> 0:11:19.600
<v Speaker 1>with their cars. I guess it comes off kind of

0:11:19.600 --> 0:11:22.960
<v Speaker 1>cree creepy though, sometimes because it's like talking about his

0:11:23.040 --> 0:11:25.680
<v Speaker 1>car in his fancy car has like a lady's name,

0:11:25.880 --> 0:11:29.079
<v Speaker 1>and it's like there's an implied relationship there. That's kind

0:11:29.080 --> 0:11:32.360
<v Speaker 1>of weird. Do do do do do? Do? Do? Do? Do?

0:11:32.440 --> 0:11:35.520
<v Speaker 1>Do do do? All right, So, I mean people do

0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:38.400
<v Speaker 1>have relationship with her with their cars. My daughter loves

0:11:38.480 --> 0:11:40.920
<v Speaker 1>our car and she kisses it. It's very odd. Does

0:11:40.920 --> 0:11:44.360
<v Speaker 1>it have a name though? Yeah? What Lightning the queen

0:11:45.400 --> 0:11:48.160
<v Speaker 1>from the movie Cars, which probably has something to do

0:11:48.160 --> 0:11:51.000
<v Speaker 1>with it. Right, Actually, the whole movie is that the

0:11:51.080 --> 0:11:54.880
<v Speaker 1>animation is a great example of anthropomorphizing. Oh yeah, yeah, totally.

0:11:55.240 --> 0:11:59.440
<v Speaker 1>Um alright, so whin Haggar's study in Austria that she

0:11:59.559 --> 0:12:02.080
<v Speaker 1>reported in two thousand and eight that people attribute human

0:12:02.080 --> 0:12:04.440
<v Speaker 1>traits to vehicles based on factors such as the shape

0:12:04.440 --> 0:12:07.160
<v Speaker 1>of the headlights and the size of the windshield because

0:12:07.400 --> 0:12:11.360
<v Speaker 1>as you've got the mouth there with the grill. She

0:12:11.480 --> 0:12:14.320
<v Speaker 1>then took the study to rural Ethiopia where there would

0:12:14.320 --> 0:12:16.800
<v Speaker 1>be less of a context right for for some of

0:12:16.840 --> 0:12:20.840
<v Speaker 1>the ways that we operate in terms of car commercials

0:12:20.840 --> 0:12:23.880
<v Speaker 1>and all all that sorts of stuff, And she found

0:12:23.960 --> 0:12:28.000
<v Speaker 1>out that the eighty nine Ethiopians who compared forty nine

0:12:28.040 --> 0:12:31.640
<v Speaker 1>renderings of cars along with nineteen different human traits including gender,

0:12:32.120 --> 0:12:35.959
<v Speaker 1>also saw the cars in a very human way, and

0:12:36.440 --> 0:12:40.320
<v Speaker 1>cars with slit like wide set headlights were judged as male,

0:12:40.840 --> 0:12:45.600
<v Speaker 1>adult and dominant by both Austrians and Ethiopians, as were

0:12:45.679 --> 0:12:50.440
<v Speaker 1>cars with smaller windshields and wider faces and smaller eyes

0:12:50.480 --> 0:12:54.800
<v Speaker 1>and foreheads. Again, the foreheads equivalent to the car windshield

0:12:55.040 --> 0:12:58.400
<v Speaker 1>were considered to be more masculine features and human faces.

0:12:58.480 --> 0:13:02.080
<v Speaker 1>So they down that the cars that were considered childlike

0:13:02.160 --> 0:13:06.760
<v Speaker 1>we're also considered more feminine, and this included closer set

0:13:06.800 --> 0:13:10.440
<v Speaker 1>headlights and larger windshields. So interesting to see these two

0:13:10.440 --> 0:13:15.680
<v Speaker 1>different cultures both ascribing human qualities to this. So yeah,

0:13:15.720 --> 0:13:20.360
<v Speaker 1>there's there's all sorts of weird emotional landscape here wrapped

0:13:20.440 --> 0:13:23.640
<v Speaker 1>up and and de humanization and anthropomorphism, and those are

0:13:23.640 --> 0:13:27.000
<v Speaker 1>really that's the same movement in different directions. I am

0:13:27.000 --> 0:13:30.040
<v Speaker 1>either adding personhood to something that is not a person,

0:13:30.120 --> 0:13:32.880
<v Speaker 1>or am I taking personhood away from something that is

0:13:33.360 --> 0:13:35.480
<v Speaker 1>uh is a person or a head to some degree

0:13:35.520 --> 0:13:37.560
<v Speaker 1>as a person. And then there's the whole person's head

0:13:37.559 --> 0:13:41.320
<v Speaker 1>thing and yeah, which we all right, let's take a

0:13:41.320 --> 0:13:43.520
<v Speaker 1>break and when we get back, we will talk about

0:13:43.840 --> 0:13:59.280
<v Speaker 1>loving robots. All right, Hey, we're back. We're talking about anthromorphism, uh,

0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:04.040
<v Speaker 1>persona vacation. We're taking objects and we're making them worthy

0:14:04.040 --> 0:14:08.520
<v Speaker 1>of concern, protection, punishment, reward. Um we can as humans,

0:14:08.640 --> 0:14:11.959
<v Speaker 1>we have this innate ability to personify anything. A pencil,

0:14:12.040 --> 0:14:14.440
<v Speaker 1>a computer, a coffee table. We you know, we we

0:14:14.480 --> 0:14:16.840
<v Speaker 1>get mad at a computer that's misbehaving on us. We

0:14:16.880 --> 0:14:20.800
<v Speaker 1>start the shouting at it, calling it names. Uh, I've

0:14:20.960 --> 0:14:23.120
<v Speaker 1>stubbed my toe on a coffee table, and I treat

0:14:23.160 --> 0:14:25.040
<v Speaker 1>the coffee table like it's an enemy, Like I want

0:14:25.040 --> 0:14:28.640
<v Speaker 1>to attack it for attacking me. Many coffee tables are

0:14:28.680 --> 0:14:31.320
<v Speaker 1>the enemy. Yeah, um yeah, And if you look at

0:14:31.360 --> 0:14:34.680
<v Speaker 1>that car study, then you can easily extrapolate that that,

0:14:35.000 --> 0:14:38.400
<v Speaker 1>you know, us us humans connecting with robots would just

0:14:38.480 --> 0:14:42.560
<v Speaker 1>be a logical conclusion, right exactly. But yeah, but we're

0:14:42.560 --> 0:14:45.880
<v Speaker 1>getting into this stage where we are using robots. I

0:14:45.880 --> 0:14:48.360
<v Speaker 1>mean already I have a robot vacuum cleaner in my house,

0:14:48.920 --> 0:14:51.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, and uh and in their robot mont lawn mowers.

0:14:51.680 --> 0:14:53.760
<v Speaker 1>We're looking at a future where robots will help care

0:14:53.800 --> 0:14:56.200
<v Speaker 1>for our elderly. They're going to be in our hospitals,

0:14:56.200 --> 0:14:58.840
<v Speaker 1>they're gonna be on our streets, and we're gonna be

0:14:58.880 --> 0:15:02.200
<v Speaker 1>interacting with them all the time. So the same model applies.

0:15:02.360 --> 0:15:05.040
<v Speaker 1>We We don't need to become more like robots to

0:15:05.120 --> 0:15:08.080
<v Speaker 1>interact with the robots that care for us and and

0:15:08.080 --> 0:15:10.880
<v Speaker 1>and do all these tasks. We want the robots to

0:15:11.000 --> 0:15:14.200
<v Speaker 1>at least meet us halfway well and meeting us halfway.

0:15:14.200 --> 0:15:16.240
<v Speaker 1>I'm glad you brought that up because it reminded me

0:15:16.400 --> 0:15:19.200
<v Speaker 1>of an episode that we did called Living with Robots,

0:15:19.200 --> 0:15:23.080
<v Speaker 1>and which we talked about the Lyric Project. And in

0:15:23.120 --> 0:15:26.680
<v Speaker 1>the Lyric Project, they had something called the Robot House.

0:15:26.720 --> 0:15:29.480
<v Speaker 1>Not to be confused with Robot House from Futurama, which

0:15:29.480 --> 0:15:33.920
<v Speaker 1>was a robot the fraternity, right, and this is not

0:15:34.040 --> 0:15:36.080
<v Speaker 1>also a new reality show by the way, at least

0:15:36.280 --> 0:15:38.360
<v Speaker 1>not yet. It would be great, they should do it,

0:15:38.560 --> 0:15:41.000
<v Speaker 1>but yeah, five weeks in the Robot House. Some some

0:15:41.040 --> 0:15:45.240
<v Speaker 1>study participants took uh their place in this house and

0:15:45.360 --> 0:15:47.640
<v Speaker 1>what they tried to figure out in this domestic setting

0:15:47.840 --> 0:15:52.920
<v Speaker 1>is how annoyed with humans get when robots were programmed

0:15:52.920 --> 0:15:56.440
<v Speaker 1>to sort of get in their space or not hand

0:15:56.440 --> 0:15:59.560
<v Speaker 1>them something in the time that they expected the human

0:15:59.600 --> 0:16:02.200
<v Speaker 1>expected the robot to hand them something. Yeah. Well, one

0:16:02.240 --> 0:16:04.080
<v Speaker 1>great example is when we came back from our break,

0:16:04.120 --> 0:16:07.800
<v Speaker 1>we both spoke at the same time, and our typical responses, oh,

0:16:07.840 --> 0:16:10.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm sorry, you go first, and you're like, oh no, no,

0:16:10.160 --> 0:16:12.480
<v Speaker 1>you go first, but you finished. But did try to

0:16:12.520 --> 0:16:15.160
<v Speaker 1>match you there for a bit. But with a robot.

0:16:15.560 --> 0:16:17.360
<v Speaker 1>One of the examples that often pointed out like, say

0:16:17.400 --> 0:16:19.440
<v Speaker 1>you and a robot reach for the same object at

0:16:19.480 --> 0:16:23.600
<v Speaker 1>the same time. Now, when humans do this, the typical

0:16:23.680 --> 0:16:26.000
<v Speaker 1>response is going to be, oh, I'm sorry, you were

0:16:26.000 --> 0:16:28.080
<v Speaker 1>reaching for that. You go ahead, you go ahead and

0:16:28.120 --> 0:16:30.360
<v Speaker 1>have some of those snacks. I'll hold up. And then

0:16:30.400 --> 0:16:31.760
<v Speaker 1>the other person will say no, no no, no, you do

0:16:31.800 --> 0:16:33.800
<v Speaker 1>it now the robot. Is the robot gonna have any

0:16:33.840 --> 0:16:36.920
<v Speaker 1>kind of programming that allows for that kind of consideration,

0:16:37.000 --> 0:16:39.440
<v Speaker 1>or the robot simply gonna grab the snacks and then

0:16:39.480 --> 0:16:43.760
<v Speaker 1>the human not realizing and you know, certainly the human

0:16:43.840 --> 0:16:47.240
<v Speaker 1>is anthromomorphizing. They're they're they're regarding this machine as some

0:16:47.280 --> 0:16:49.880
<v Speaker 1>sort of a human entity to some degree. How are

0:16:49.880 --> 0:16:51.360
<v Speaker 1>they going to react? They're gonna think, oh, well, that's

0:16:51.360 --> 0:16:53.920
<v Speaker 1>stinchy robot trying to get these snacks before I can

0:16:53.960 --> 0:16:56.560
<v Speaker 1>have some. That's totally rude. So how do you You

0:16:56.600 --> 0:16:59.280
<v Speaker 1>have to start thinking of ways to program the robot

0:16:59.400 --> 0:17:03.560
<v Speaker 1>to behave in a human capacity and even these small

0:17:04.119 --> 0:17:10.040
<v Speaker 1>little interactions just to avoid sort of subliminal hostility blossoming up. Yeah,

0:17:10.080 --> 0:17:11.840
<v Speaker 1>because what they found in this study is that people

0:17:11.920 --> 0:17:13.960
<v Speaker 1>did start to think that the robots were doing things

0:17:14.080 --> 0:17:17.760
<v Speaker 1>on purpose and and really starting to get angry with them.

0:17:17.800 --> 0:17:20.679
<v Speaker 1>And this is not just a crazy one off experiment.

0:17:20.720 --> 0:17:25.719
<v Speaker 1>That's really this This field of human robotics interaction, uh,

0:17:26.080 --> 0:17:28.520
<v Speaker 1>is something that's only like a decade old. But the

0:17:28.520 --> 0:17:32.080
<v Speaker 1>reason is there is because it is forthcoming, and you know,

0:17:32.240 --> 0:17:33.280
<v Speaker 1>you do want some