October 1, 2013 • 17 mins
Will our robots ever love us? And what does that question reveal about the true nature of this much-touted human emotion? Find out in this episode of Stuff to Blow Your Mind.
Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.com
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from how Stuff
Works dot com. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind.
My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Julie Douglas. Julie.
Two questions. First of all, should humans love their technology?
That's the first question. Second question, should technology love humans? Okay, um,
(00:27):
I'm gonna say yes and yes because I think that
you can't stop love in any form, right, yeah, yeah,
I think that we and I think we we'll maybe
make this case today. I don't know, or we'll just
muddle the whole concept of love. But I do think
that we can't help but to to love our technology
and be attached to it, and eventually that will become
(00:48):
this idea that robots will be programmed to love us
because we just love love. Well, that that sounds sweet.
But I think you can stop love. I think love
is a very stoppable force. I think it's a virus. Yeah,
it persists. The viruses are stoppable, some of them. So
if we have the ability to to stop some forms
(01:10):
of love in their tracks. Because the first thing we
need to discuss is, of course, the nature of love.
What is love? Because love is a is just a
word like love is a big tent that encompasses a
lot of things. I mean, because you know, obviously there's
a loved one feels for one's wife, there's a loved
one feels for one's child. There's the love one feels
for like a really good sandwich, And these are vastly
(01:34):
different emotional states. Oh yeah, I think that Aristotle had
a sandwich love category. Yeah. Yeah. You can kill a
love for a sandwich if you just say, oh, well
that actually that sandwich isn't very good for you, or
those ingredients are really foul, or that restaurant got a
really crippling and a health rating. Uh, And then you
might be, oh, well, maybe I don't love this sandwich
is much, or you could over indulge in the sandwich.
(01:56):
Whereas it's harder to kill the love safe for you know,
for a spouse or a child or something. Just because
someone says, well, that kid's hair is a little weird.
You're not gonna be like, oh well, okay, love removed
generally generally speaking, sometimes how bad the hair is. Yeah, um,
did you know that what is love? Was the most
searched phrase on Google in two thousand and twelve. Really,
(02:18):
people want to know, were they looking for that song?
Isn't that what is love? Baby don't hurt? That song?
That what keeps saying it baby don't hurt me? Mm hmm,
that's all I know. Yeah, No, I don't think it
was that song, but I'm glad that we got to
get you. That might have been the searches. We're just
looking for those lyrics. It's possible, It's possible. But well, this,
(02:40):
this idea that people are searching for the meaning of
love had one Guardian article called what is Love talked
to several different experts about their take on love, which
was sort of interesting because again, here's this big, huge
concept that has so many different meanings and so many
different categories, and to the point where the word itself
(03:01):
tends to lose meaning. You know, like when someone says, oh,
I love something, it almost is a pointless thing to
say because it's such an overused word that it we've
we've just stripped it of all its power. That is true.
I was just thinking that with my daughter, I don't
like her to say the word hate. I oftentimes will say,
do you truly hate that? You know? Is it just
(03:24):
that you dislike it? Because that's a word that's very strong.
But I never say do you really love that? Are
you sure you love that? Because there's so much positivity
associated with it. Uh. Theoretical physicist and science writer Jim
Al Khalil had said that while lust is a temporary,
passionate sexual desire involving the increased release of chemicals like
(03:47):
testosterone and estrogen, he says that in true love or attachment,
in bonding, the brain can release a whole set of
chemicals pheromones, dopamine, nor epinephrin, UH, serotonin, oxytocin, embasso, pressant. So,
he says, from an evolutionary perspective, love can be viewed
as a survival tool, a mechanism that we evolve to
promote long term relationships, mutual defense and parental support of children,
(04:09):
and to promote feelings of safe safety insecurity. Yeah. So
it's basically a chemical bond to things that enable us
to better perform our genetic mission as organisms. There are
several different versions of love. They're laid out in this
this particular article. For instance, there's philia, the deep non
sexual intimacy between close friends or family members or soldiers
(04:32):
in the trench. You know, it's uh, it's this this
bond of love that's you know, not sexual, not romantic,
but it's it's you know, it's your your your bros
kind of you know kind of love, bras bras bra love.
I guess, Okay, Yeah, then there's a there's a lotus
playful affection that found in fooling around or flirting. Now
(04:54):
this one is I guess a little harder to like
nail that. I mean, I guess I can think of
some past example to that, you know, where you're kind
of like flirty with somebody, but you're not really going
after them per se. You know that it doesn't seem
to be much to that one, right, because that's such
an ephemeral stage. Yeah, it's kind of like like that
one's just like I mean, that one can be killed
by the sobering up a bit. I think, you know,
(05:16):
like that's not it's barely love. It seems a little
cheap to even classify it as a form of love,
doesn't it. Yeah, then there's a pragma, the mature love
that develops over a long period of time between long
term couples. Uh. And this and this is really you know,
when people talk about all that deep love that grows
out of relationship because the relationship maybe may begin with
(05:36):
lust or even this lootus thing we're talking about, or
it may be begin with philia, but over time it
develops into this strong bond, this bond where it's it's
built over time and in a way that it just
can't be uh, you know, pulled off a shelf, and
it involves just a lot of goodwill towards another person.
It's like wanting the best for someone regardless of the cost.
(05:59):
So you might not have a huge surge in dopamine
or vasopressin um or even oxytocin, but it's there. It's
still you know, from from a chemical level, is still
sort of running behind the scenes. Uh. Then there's a
cape the more generalized love that I remember hearing a
lot about in church. That's kind of like this sort
of universal love love everybody, love your neighbor, right, even
(06:21):
if it doesn't seem practical. Uh, it's just kind of
an idealized, good natured, be cool of everyone, which you know,
there is a good, good way to look at the
world if you can, if you can do it, Yeah,
it's kind of the seventies love hug. Then there is
self love or philapia, which is uh is maybe not
as selfish as it sounds, to be clear, and not
(06:43):
talking about self love in the sexual context either, no, no, no,
no no no. Um and uh yeah, this just means uh,
I mean you can break it down to the fact
that if you're gonna care about others, you need to
be able to care about yourself. And then there's of
course eros sexual passion and desire. Uh. And you know,
and this is again when people talk about love at
first sight in terms of a male female romantic relationship,
(07:06):
this is often what they're actually talking about. I believe
you know, they're they're talking about arrows. They're talking about
lust and physical attraction, sexual attraction that may again eventually
morph into some other form of love or just fall
off entirely. Yeah. That's what I feel it should be
astrict like, it's not really a form of love unless
it becomes philia or pragma, yeah, or some other type
(07:26):
of love. It's more like a pre love secretion or
something I don't know, depends that you want to secretion. Yeah,
Because again we're talking a lot about about hormones flowing
about about you know, your hormonal response to a potential
may your hormonal response to um, you know, an infant,
a child, you know, some sort of offspring. There's there's
(07:48):
a lot of secreting going on. There is a lot
of secreting, and you can't really secrete all of those
for just one person, right, all those different types of love.
I mean, perhaps there's that one rare person in your
life that can take on all those roles of love,
but most likely your family, your friends, your community take
on all these different aspects of it. In this article,
they also talk to a philosopher to talk about love
(08:10):
as a passionate commitment, which really kind of flows in
with the with the progment we were talking about. Yep,
it says that we have to This is from Julian Baggini.
The philosopher said that we need to nurture and develop it,
even though it usually arrives in our lives unbidden. So
you take this idea of what love could be, and
then you begin to think about how we love objects
(08:33):
or things, and I started to think about this idea
of apophenia. Now, apophenia is um this sort of unmotivated
seeing of a connection and a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness.
That we ascribed to an object, and this was defined
by German neurologists and psychologist Clause Conrad. So that means
(08:54):
when you look at an inanimate object and you see
what looks like a pair of eyes and a nose
in the mouth, you're unconsciously try to make sense of
the data in front of you, and you're describing it
with something that is not what it actually is. Right,
But it's our human context that we're bringing with us
all the time, So we can't help to sort of
project those humanness feelings onto something. Yeah, and um, as
(09:16):
you've brought up before, the we have this surprising ability
to see faces like you really you don't have to
put a smiley face even on something to give it
this sense of person and give it, I mean we can.
We We glimpse faces in the clouds, we glimpse faces
on the moon, and it's all just kind of this, uh,
you know, this atavistic resonance where our pattern seeking brains
are looking for things that affect us and what would
(09:38):
affect us more than it's ap peering into the night
and seeing the face of man or beast, you know,
lurching there in the dark, that would be some vital
information you need to know because friend or foe is
is right upon you. Yeah. Actually, Sonia Wynn Hager, she's
an anthropologist at the University of Vienna, said in an
interview with Life Science that this tendency would have likely
(09:58):
protected our ants susters and she said taking a bear
for a stone might be lethal, but the opposite does
no harm. Yeah, you get down to that whole thing
of that whole situation with type one and type two airs.
You know, one air means that, oh, you got me,
You're not actually a bear trying to eat me, and
the other air is, um, oh you're actually a bear
and you just devoured me. So which one, obviously does
(10:21):
evolution end up selected? Yeah, what's the error that you're
going to have? And so then you have this apophenia,
this pattern recognition, seeing patterns everywhere, and you meld that
together with anthropomorphism, and that's giving human characteristics to animals
and inanimate objects, and you begin to see that as humans,
we are going to maybe shovel off some of our
(10:42):
emotions onto these objects. And I wanted to bring up
this study that wind Hagger and her colleagues UH conducted
this this tendency for us to actually personify cars. Now,
she conducted this this study, and auto never understood. You know,
it happens all the time, especially in TV shows where
someone's got a car and it's got this this lady's
(11:04):
name night Rider. Well but that was what kit I think, yes,
that that car actually talked and had personality and uh,
and they loved each other. But it's that that's the
fantasy of the relationship that some people want to have
with their cars. I guess it comes off kind of
cree creepy though, sometimes because it's like talking about his
car in his fancy car has like a lady's name,
(11:25):
and it's like there's an implied relationship there. That's kind
of weird. Do do do do do? Do? Do? Do? Do?
Do do do? All right, So, I mean people do
have relationship with her with their cars. My daughter loves
our car and she kisses it. It's very odd. Does
it have a name though? Yeah? What Lightning the queen
from the movie Cars, which probably has something to do
(11:48):
with it. Right, Actually, the whole movie is that the
animation is a great example of anthropomorphizing. Oh yeah, yeah, totally.
Um alright, so whin Haggar's study in Austria that she
reported in two thousand and eight that people attribute human
traits to vehicles based on factors such as the shape
of the headlights and the size of the windshield because
as you've got the mouth there with the grill. She
(12:11):
then took the study to rural Ethiopia where there would
be less of a context right for for some of
the ways that we operate in terms of car commercials
and all all that sorts of stuff, And she found
out that the eighty nine Ethiopians who compared forty nine
renderings of cars along with nineteen different human traits including gender,
(12:32):
also saw the cars in a very human way, and
cars with slit like wide set headlights were judged as male,
adult and dominant by both Austrians and Ethiopians, as were
cars with smaller windshields and wider faces and smaller eyes
and foreheads. Again, the foreheads equivalent to the car windshield
(12:55):
were considered to be more masculine features and human faces.
So they down that the cars that were considered childlike
we're also considered more feminine, and this included closer set
headlights and larger windshields. So interesting to see these two
different cultures both ascribing human qualities to this. So yeah,
(13:15):
there's there's all sorts of weird emotional landscape here wrapped
up and and de humanization and anthropomorphism, and those are
really that's the same movement in different directions. I am
either adding personhood to something that is not a person,
or am I taking personhood away from something that is
uh is a person or a head to some degree
as a person. And then there's the whole person's head
(13:37):
thing and yeah, which we all right, let's take a
break and when we get back, we will talk about
loving robots. All right, Hey, we're back. We're talking about anthromorphism, uh,
(13:59):
persona vacation. We're taking objects and we're making them worthy
of concern, protection, punishment, reward. Um we can as humans,
we have this innate ability to personify anything. A pencil,
a computer, a coffee table. We you know, we we
get mad at a computer that's misbehaving on us. We
start the shouting at it, calling it names. Uh, I've
(14:20):
stubbed my toe on a coffee table, and I treat
the coffee table like it's an enemy, Like I want
to attack it for attacking me. Many coffee tables are
the enemy. Yeah, um yeah, And if you look at
that car study, then you can easily extrapolate that that,
you know, us us humans connecting with robots would just
be a logical conclusion, right exactly. But yeah, but we're
(14:42):
getting into this stage where we are using robots. I
mean already I have a robot vacuum cleaner in my house,
you know, and uh and in their robot mont lawn mowers.
We're looking at a future where robots will help care
for our elderly. They're going to be in our hospitals,
they're gonna be on our streets, and we're gonna be
interacting with them all the time. So the same model applies.
We We don't need to become more like robots to
(15:05):
interact with the robots that care for us and and
and do all these tasks. We want the robots to
at least meet us halfway well and meeting us halfway.
I'm glad you brought that up because it reminded me
of an episode that we did called Living with Robots,
and which we talked about the Lyric Project. And in
the Lyric Project, they had something called the Robot House.
(15:26):
Not to be confused with Robot House from Futurama, which
was a robot the fraternity, right, and this is not
also a new reality show by the way, at least
not yet. It would be great, they should do it,
but yeah, five weeks in the Robot House. Some some
study participants took uh their place in this house and
what they tried to figure out in this domestic setting
(15:47):
is how annoyed with humans get when robots were programmed
to sort of get in their space or not hand
them something in the time that they expected the human
expected the robot to hand them something. Yeah. Well, one
great example is when we came back from our break,
we both spoke at the same time, and our typical responses, oh,
I'm sorry, you go first, and you're like, oh no, no,
(16:10):
you go first, but you finished. But did try to
match you there for a bit. But with a robot.
One of the examples that often pointed out like, say
you and a robot reach for the same object at
the same time. Now, when humans do this, the typical
response is going to be, oh, I'm sorry, you were
reaching for that. You go ahead, you go ahead and
have some of those snacks. I'll hold up. And then
(16:30):
the other person will say no, no no, no, you do
it now the robot. Is the robot gonna have any
kind of programming that allows for that kind of consideration,
or the robot simply gonna grab the snacks and then
the human not realizing and you know, certainly the human
is anthromomorphizing. They're they're they're regarding this machine as some
sort of a human entity to some degree. How are
they going to react? They're gonna think, oh, well, that's
(16:51):
stinchy robot trying to get these snacks before I can
have some. That's totally rude. So how do you You
have to start thinking of ways to program the robot
to behave in a human capacity and even these small
little interactions just to avoid sort of subliminal hostility blossoming up. Yeah,
because what they found in this study is that people
(17:11):
did start to think that the robots were doing things
on purpose and and really starting to get angry with them.
And this is not just a crazy one off experiment.
That's really this This field of human robotics interaction, uh,
is something that's only like a decade old. But the
reason is there is because it is forthcoming, and you know,
(17:32):
you do want some
Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from how Stuff
Works dot com. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind.
My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Julie Douglas. Julie.
Two questions. First of all, should humans love their technology?
That's the first question. Second question, should technology love humans? Okay, um,
(00:27):
I'm gonna say yes and yes because I think that
you can't stop love in any form, right, yeah, yeah,
I think that we and I think we we'll maybe
make this case today. I don't know, or we'll just
muddle the whole concept of love. But I do think
that we can't help but to to love our technology
and be attached to it, and eventually that will become
(00:48):
this idea that robots will be programmed to love us
because we just love love. Well, that that sounds sweet.
But I think you can stop love. I think love
is a very stoppable force. I think it's a virus. Yeah,
it persists. The viruses are stoppable, some of them. So
if we have the ability to to stop some forms
(01:10):
of love in their tracks. Because the first thing we
need to discuss is, of course, the nature of love.
What is love? Because love is a is just a
word like love is a big tent that encompasses a
lot of things. I mean, because you know, obviously there's
a loved one feels for one's wife, there's a loved
one feels for one's child. There's the love one feels
for like a really good sandwich, And these are vastly
(01:34):
different emotional states. Oh yeah, I think that Aristotle had
a sandwich love category. Yeah. Yeah. You can kill a
love for a sandwich if you just say, oh, well
that actually that sandwich isn't very good for you, or
those ingredients are really foul, or that restaurant got a
really crippling and a health rating. Uh, And then you
might be, oh, well, maybe I don't love this sandwich
is much, or you could over indulge in the sandwich.
(01:56):
Whereas it's harder to kill the love safe for you know,
for a spouse or a child or something. Just because
someone says, well, that kid's hair is a little weird.
You're not gonna be like, oh well, okay, love removed
generally generally speaking, sometimes how bad the hair is. Yeah, um,
did you know that what is love? Was the most
searched phrase on Google in two thousand and twelve. Really,
(02:18):
people want to know, were they looking for that song?
Isn't that what is love? Baby don't hurt? That song?
That what keeps saying it baby don't hurt me? Mm hmm,
that's all I know. Yeah, No, I don't think it
was that song, but I'm glad that we got to
get you. That might have been the searches. We're just
looking for those lyrics. It's possible, It's possible. But well, this,
(02:40):
this idea that people are searching for the meaning of
love had one Guardian article called what is Love talked
to several different experts about their take on love, which
was sort of interesting because again, here's this big, huge
concept that has so many different meanings and so many
different categories, and to the point where the word itself
(03:01):
tends to lose meaning. You know, like when someone says, oh,
I love something, it almost is a pointless thing to
say because it's such an overused word that it we've
we've just stripped it of all its power. That is true.
I was just thinking that with my daughter, I don't
like her to say the word hate. I oftentimes will say,
do you truly hate that? You know? Is it just
(03:24):
that you dislike it? Because that's a word that's very strong.
But I never say do you really love that? Are
you sure you love that? Because there's so much positivity
associated with it. Uh. Theoretical physicist and science writer Jim
Al Khalil had said that while lust is a temporary,
passionate sexual desire involving the increased release of chemicals like
(03:47):
testosterone and estrogen, he says that in true love or attachment,
in bonding, the brain can release a whole set of
chemicals pheromones, dopamine, nor epinephrin, UH, serotonin, oxytocin, embasso, pressant. So,
he says, from an evolutionary perspective, love can be viewed
as a survival tool, a mechanism that we evolve to
promote long term relationships, mutual defense and parental support of children,
(04:09):
and to promote feelings of safe safety insecurity. Yeah. So
it's basically a chemical bond to things that enable us
to better perform our genetic mission as organisms. There are
several different versions of love. They're laid out in this
this particular article. For instance, there's philia, the deep non
sexual intimacy between close friends or family members or soldiers
(04:32):
in the trench. You know, it's uh, it's this this
bond of love that's you know, not sexual, not romantic,
but it's it's you know, it's your your your bros
kind of you know kind of love, bras bras bra love.
I guess, Okay, Yeah, then there's a there's a lotus
playful affection that found in fooling around or flirting. Now
(04:54):
this one is I guess a little harder to like
nail that. I mean, I guess I can think of
some past example to that, you know, where you're kind
of like flirty with somebody, but you're not really going
after them per se. You know that it doesn't seem
to be much to that one, right, because that's such
an ephemeral stage. Yeah, it's kind of like like that
one's just like I mean, that one can be killed
by the sobering up a bit. I think, you know,
(05:16):
like that's not it's barely love. It seems a little
cheap to even classify it as a form of love,
doesn't it. Yeah, then there's a pragma, the mature love
that develops over a long period of time between long
term couples. Uh. And this and this is really you know,
when people talk about all that deep love that grows
out of relationship because the relationship maybe may begin with
(05:36):
lust or even this lootus thing we're talking about, or
it may be begin with philia, but over time it
develops into this strong bond, this bond where it's it's
built over time and in a way that it just
can't be uh, you know, pulled off a shelf, and
it involves just a lot of goodwill towards another person.
It's like wanting the best for someone regardless of the cost.
(05:59):
So you might not have a huge surge in dopamine
or vasopressin um or even oxytocin, but it's there. It's
still you know, from from a chemical level, is still
sort of running behind the scenes. Uh. Then there's a
cape the more generalized love that I remember hearing a
lot about in church. That's kind of like this sort
of universal love love everybody, love your neighbor, right, even
(06:21):
if it doesn't seem practical. Uh, it's just kind of
an idealized, good natured, be cool of everyone, which you know,
there is a good, good way to look at the
world if you can, if you can do it, Yeah,
it's kind of the seventies love hug. Then there is
self love or philapia, which is uh is maybe not
as selfish as it sounds, to be clear, and not
(06:43):
talking about self love in the sexual context either, no, no, no,
no no no. Um and uh yeah, this just means uh,
I mean you can break it down to the fact
that if you're gonna care about others, you need to
be able to care about yourself. And then there's of
course eros sexual passion and desire. Uh. And you know,
and this is again when people talk about love at
first sight in terms of a male female romantic relationship,
(07:06):
this is often what they're actually talking about. I believe
you know, they're they're talking about arrows. They're talking about
lust and physical attraction, sexual attraction that may again eventually
morph into some other form of love or just fall
off entirely. Yeah. That's what I feel it should be
astrict like, it's not really a form of love unless
it becomes philia or pragma, yeah, or some other type
(07:26):
of love. It's more like a pre love secretion or
something I don't know, depends that you want to secretion. Yeah,
Because again we're talking a lot about about hormones flowing
about about you know, your hormonal response to a potential
may your hormonal response to um, you know, an infant,
a child, you know, some sort of offspring. There's there's
(07:48):
a lot of secreting going on. There is a lot
of secreting, and you can't really secrete all of those
for just one person, right, all those different types of love.
I mean, perhaps there's that one rare person in your
life that can take on all those roles of love,
but most likely your family, your friends, your community take
on all these different aspects of it. In this article,
they also talk to a philosopher to talk about love
(08:10):
as a passionate commitment, which really kind of flows in
with the with the progment we were talking about. Yep,
it says that we have to This is from Julian Baggini.
The philosopher said that we need to nurture and develop it,
even though it usually arrives in our lives unbidden. So
you take this idea of what love could be, and
then you begin to think about how we love objects
(08:33):
or things, and I started to think about this idea
of apophenia. Now, apophenia is um this sort of unmotivated
seeing of a connection and a specific feeling of abnormal meaningfulness.
That we ascribed to an object, and this was defined
by German neurologists and psychologist Clause Conrad. So that means
(08:54):
when you look at an inanimate object and you see
what looks like a pair of eyes and a nose
in the mouth, you're unconsciously try to make sense of
the data in front of you, and you're describing it
with something that is not what it actually is. Right,
But it's our human context that we're bringing with us
all the time, So we can't help to sort of
project those humanness feelings onto something. Yeah, and um, as
(09:16):
you've brought up before, the we have this surprising ability
to see faces like you really you don't have to
put a smiley face even on something to give it
this sense of person and give it, I mean we can.
We We glimpse faces in the clouds, we glimpse faces
on the moon, and it's all just kind of this, uh,
you know, this atavistic resonance where our pattern seeking brains
are looking for things that affect us and what would
(09:38):
affect us more than it's ap peering into the night
and seeing the face of man or beast, you know,
lurching there in the dark, that would be some vital
information you need to know because friend or foe is
is right upon you. Yeah. Actually, Sonia Wynn Hager, she's
an anthropologist at the University of Vienna, said in an
interview with Life Science that this tendency would have likely
(09:58):
protected our ants susters and she said taking a bear
for a stone might be lethal, but the opposite does
no harm. Yeah, you get down to that whole thing
of that whole situation with type one and type two airs.
You know, one air means that, oh, you got me,
You're not actually a bear trying to eat me, and
the other air is, um, oh you're actually a bear
and you just devoured me. So which one, obviously does
(10:21):
evolution end up selected? Yeah, what's the error that you're
going to have? And so then you have this apophenia,
this pattern recognition, seeing patterns everywhere, and you meld that
together with anthropomorphism, and that's giving human characteristics to animals
and inanimate objects, and you begin to see that as humans,
we are going to maybe shovel off some of our
(10:42):
emotions onto these objects. And I wanted to bring up
this study that wind Hagger and her colleagues UH conducted
this this tendency for us to actually personify cars. Now,
she conducted this this study, and auto never understood. You know,
it happens all the time, especially in TV shows where
someone's got a car and it's got this this lady's
(11:04):
name night Rider. Well but that was what kit I think, yes,
that that car actually talked and had personality and uh,
and they loved each other. But it's that that's the
fantasy of the relationship that some people want to have
with their cars. I guess it comes off kind of
cree creepy though, sometimes because it's like talking about his
car in his fancy car has like a lady's name,
(11:25):
and it's like there's an implied relationship there. That's kind
of weird. Do do do do do? Do? Do? Do? Do?
Do do do? All right, So, I mean people do
have relationship with her with their cars. My daughter loves
our car and she kisses it. It's very odd. Does
it have a name though? Yeah? What Lightning the queen
from the movie Cars, which probably has something to do
(11:48):
with it. Right, Actually, the whole movie is that the
animation is a great example of anthropomorphizing. Oh yeah, yeah, totally.
Um alright, so whin Haggar's study in Austria that she
reported in two thousand and eight that people attribute human
traits to vehicles based on factors such as the shape
of the headlights and the size of the windshield because
as you've got the mouth there with the grill. She
(12:11):
then took the study to rural Ethiopia where there would
be less of a context right for for some of
the ways that we operate in terms of car commercials
and all all that sorts of stuff, And she found
out that the eighty nine Ethiopians who compared forty nine
renderings of cars along with nineteen different human traits including gender,
(12:32):
also saw the cars in a very human way, and
cars with slit like wide set headlights were judged as male,
adult and dominant by both Austrians and Ethiopians, as were
cars with smaller windshields and wider faces and smaller eyes
and foreheads. Again, the foreheads equivalent to the car windshield
(12:55):
were considered to be more masculine features and human faces.
So they down that the cars that were considered childlike
we're also considered more feminine, and this included closer set
headlights and larger windshields. So interesting to see these two
different cultures both ascribing human qualities to this. So yeah,
(13:15):
there's there's all sorts of weird emotional landscape here wrapped
up and and de humanization and anthropomorphism, and those are
really that's the same movement in different directions. I am
either adding personhood to something that is not a person,
or am I taking personhood away from something that is
uh is a person or a head to some degree
as a person. And then there's the whole person's head
(13:37):
thing and yeah, which we all right, let's take a
break and when we get back, we will talk about
loving robots. All right, Hey, we're back. We're talking about anthromorphism, uh,
(13:59):
persona vacation. We're taking objects and we're making them worthy
of concern, protection, punishment, reward. Um we can as humans,
we have this innate ability to personify anything. A pencil,
a computer, a coffee table. We you know, we we
get mad at a computer that's misbehaving on us. We
start the shouting at it, calling it names. Uh, I've
(14:20):
stubbed my toe on a coffee table, and I treat
the coffee table like it's an enemy, Like I want
to attack it for attacking me. Many coffee tables are
the enemy. Yeah, um yeah, And if you look at
that car study, then you can easily extrapolate that that,
you know, us us humans connecting with robots would just
be a logical conclusion, right exactly. But yeah, but we're
(14:42):
getting into this stage where we are using robots. I
mean already I have a robot vacuum cleaner in my house,
you know, and uh and in their robot mont lawn mowers.
We're looking at a future where robots will help care
for our elderly. They're going to be in our hospitals,
they're gonna be on our streets, and we're gonna be
interacting with them all the time. So the same model applies.
We We don't need to become more like robots to
(15:05):
interact with the robots that care for us and and
and do all these tasks. We want the robots to
at least meet us halfway well and meeting us halfway.
I'm glad you brought that up because it reminded me
of an episode that we did called Living with Robots,
and which we talked about the Lyric Project. And in
the Lyric Project, they had something called the Robot House.
(15:26):
Not to be confused with Robot House from Futurama, which
was a robot the fraternity, right, and this is not
also a new reality show by the way, at least
not yet. It would be great, they should do it,
but yeah, five weeks in the Robot House. Some some
study participants took uh their place in this house and
what they tried to figure out in this domestic setting
(15:47):
is how annoyed with humans get when robots were programmed
to sort of get in their space or not hand
them something in the time that they expected the human
expected the robot to hand them something. Yeah. Well, one
great example is when we came back from our break,
we both spoke at the same time, and our typical responses, oh,
I'm sorry, you go first, and you're like, oh no, no,
(16:10):
you go first, but you finished. But did try to
match you there for a bit. But with a robot.
One of the examples that often pointed out like, say
you and a robot reach for the same object at
the same time. Now, when humans do this, the typical
response is going to be, oh, I'm sorry, you were
reaching for that. You go ahead, you go ahead and
have some of those snacks. I'll hold up. And then
(16:30):
the other person will say no, no no, no, you do
it now the robot. Is the robot gonna have any
kind of programming that allows for that kind of consideration,
or the robot simply gonna grab the snacks and then
the human not realizing and you know, certainly the human
is anthromomorphizing. They're they're they're regarding this machine as some
sort of a human entity to some degree. How are
they going to react? They're gonna think, oh, well, that's
(16:51):
stinchy robot trying to get these snacks before I can
have some. That's totally rude. So how do you You
have to start thinking of ways to program the robot
to behave in a human capacity and even these small
little interactions just to avoid sort of subliminal hostility blossoming up. Yeah,
because what they found in this study is that people
(17:11):
did start to think that the robots were doing things
on purpose and and really starting to get angry with them.
And this is not just a crazy one off experiment.
That's really this This field of human robotics interaction, uh,
is something that's only like a decade old. But the
reason is there is because it is forthcoming, and you know,
(17:32):
you do want some
Stuff To Blow Your Mind News
Hosts And Creators
Robert Lamb
Joe McCormick
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.