How human are synths?

[Raycheetah]

So, criminal acts void a Mr. Handy's warranty? =0[.]o=

[JuJooGuppy]

Lol, not really sure how all that would work. Guess they would auto-report criminal activity..?

Its hard to get an idea of just how much free will Mr Handy's have in their programming. I guess I was more getting at, they clearly have restrictions within their code preventing normal full free will. Where as Gen 3's are lacking said restriction, which is why I would classify them as being a 'living machine' and worthy of consideration of more than a tool.

Its funny though that we are discussing this, the BoS doesn't seem to fear rampant robots such as their precious prime... whom, if on the fritz, would be equally as dangerous (or more so) than synths

[UhuruNUru]

Easy gen 1 and 2 robot, gen 3 are 100% human, it's clearly stated they can't be identified as synths because they are not.

Slavers have always dehumanised the slaves.

 

How do the Institute control the Synths. this is clearly spelled out in the game, far from leaving the decision to the player, Bethesda rubs the players nose in the fact by making Kellog (Think that's his name, kidnapper) a human synth.

He even goes to the trouble of explaining how the institute controls him and Synths. Through mechanisms implanted in the brain. Kellog was as obviously 3rd Gen Synth prototype, just as Valentine was a 1st Gen.

 

Even all the talk of missing people, kidnapped is another clue.

You know Kellog Prototype exists.

You're shown the SuperMutant experiments on Test subjects.

Kellog even infers he's a failed experiment and the Institute hoped for more control.

An empty mind, in a cloned body, proved Gen 3 was easier to control, than the active mind slave kidnap victims.

 

I never had any doubt about that fact, indeed thought it was clearly laid out and the major ingredient of the moral dilemma presented to the player, knowing Synths are clearly human and enslaved. What would you do.

 

That some insist synths are obviously machines, despite all the evidence being intentionally under your nose.

 

Even when a robot's mind is placed in a blank synth body, the result is clearly human.

 

The real question is why despite all the evidence to the contrary, does anybody think and/or say they are machines.

[Deleted3507349User]

Easy gen 1 and 2 robot, gen 3 are 100% human, it's clearly stated they can't be identified as synths because they are not.

Slavers have always dehumanised the slaves.

 

How do the Institute control the Synths. this is clearly spelled out in the game, far from leaving the decision to the player, Bethesda rubs the players nose in the fact by making Kellog (Think that's his name, kidnapper) a human synth.

He even goes to the trouble of explaining how the institute controls him and Synths. Through mechanisms implanted in the brain. Kellog was as obviously 3rd Gen Synth prototype, just as Valentine was a 1st Gen.

 

Even all the talk of missing people, kidnapped is another clue.

You know Kellog Prototype exists.

You're shown the SuperMutant experiments on Test subjects.

Kellog even infers he's a failed experiment and the Institute hoped for more control.

An empty mind, in a cloned body, proved Gen 3 was easier to control, than the active mind slave kidnap victims.

 

I never had any doubt about that fact, indeed thought it was clearly laid out and the major ingredient of the moral dilemma presented to the player, knowing Synths are clearly human and enslaved. What would you do.

 

That some insist synths are obviously machines, despite all the evidence being intentionally under your nose.

 

Even when a robot's mind is placed in a blank synth body, the result is clearly human.

 

The real question is why despite all the evidence to the contrary, does anybody think and/or say they are machines.

The answer to your last question lies in the word 'synthetic'. Synths are manufactured. If they were manufactured to the shape of crocodiles, would anyone take the position that they were human? What about the synthetic animals the Institute has been creating? It's implied they use the same base stock. This is why I took the position that they are not and and cannot be human. Humanoid would have to be the proper term. The ethical and moral issues are a completely separate issue, and that's where the debate really lies.

[Klipperken]

Synths are machines, nothing more.

That's quite an extreme thought, ain't it?

 

Think Blade Runner: Roy wanted to just LIVE.

Having a 4 year lifespan was not enough for him.

 

But here's the thing: in the end, Roy was FAR MORE human than Deckard ever was vs the Replicants.

So, a "machine" is just a machine?

I beg the difference, bro!

 

Nothing is as inhumane as a human.

[Jasemyne]

Mr Kellog ain't synthetized but technically pimped out with artificial spare parts, a cyborg born by a mother with extended life expectation. That fate many among us share already today (after accidents, war etc) and they all are happy that this is technically possible. Accordingly, a cyborg is no new life form, just an optimized individual, the other guy next door.

Mr Gutsy & Co are robots with limited, programmed capabilities to perform specific work and communication routines and Super Muties are nothing but genetically modified women (at least in Fallout 3), products of the Enclave, the ultimate soldiers. The game states that this process would be reversible by a special, less tested serum.

Synth-1 and -2 are (mass-fabricated) androids, humanoid robots that imitate man and thus resemble a human being, the classical 'toaster' in Science Fiction. If such a toaster 'lives' or not is still in the debate, a probably endless one but not for Bethesda - Nick Valentine 2.0 lives.

Synth-3 are fully synthesized beings, no longer born but grown and equipped with full consciousness. That's a totally new humanoid species made from scratch, a scientific cocktail, the artificial cousin from the laboratory. So, a long as we don't greet an intelligent chimpanzee as our brother, a Synth-3 lives parallel to us without being one of us as a species of its own, and the coursers that aim at perfection will tell you precisely that - as the competitor in scavenging man must be eradicated from the Commonwealth. Until chance comes and the Institute kicks 'em out, their memory erased by the Railroad shortly afterwards. Those individuals adopt certain aspects of humanity to the extremes - Synths must be eradicated from the Commonwealth precisely by the reason mentioned above - like a prominent figure in game, the hero in his shiny armor that inevitably must fall for which must not cannot be.

More interesting is the type-4 Synth prototype that totally rejects to be a Synth and instead vividly believes and feels to be as human as humans can be. Different from a type-3 you don't have to tell him that his actions and feelings are actually human, type-4 knows it 'cause he doesn't understand otherwise. And you simply can't convince a type-4 that he's actually a Synth and not a human, neither with official lists that might refer to his production code nor with much talking, he'd just get sick like all of us would. He's to be switched off and on again by the personal god he looks up to, yes, but ain't we all? At least a great many people on the planet believe that.

Like any other Wastelander, Bostonians are post-war humans, no matter to what raiding faction in the Commonwealth they belong. They all are to some extent fallout mutations with reduced fertility and all-too often mush for brains. That's why the high technology faction in game once was vividly interested in genetically non-mutated pre-war material and Shaun the baby comes into play, a precious genetic material, indeed.

Kidnapping happens all the time in the Commonwealth, but not perhaps caused by the Institute, the 'bogeyman', that's following the Wilson affair between Institute and the Minutemen just a self-fulfilling propaganda, eventually an Institute propaganda ('fear us or we'd come after you!') to keep their share in the common scavenging of the Commonwealth.

 

Just my 2 pesos.

And remember: Don't feed the yao guai!

Edited January 29, 2016 by Jasemyne

[Boombro]

 

If they were manufactured to the shape of crocodiles, would anyone take the position that they were human?

Personally, I would. If my cat suddenly was able to have the mind of a human for some odd fiction-like reason. I will treat her like a human and tell her to clean her own box.

It not about what a thing looks like, but it state of mind. I guess it hard since humans are the only ones advance creatures.

[TheOriginalEvilD]

Something I noticed is completely missing from this game is the use of human brains in robots like in past games. If a synth had a human brain, I would be far more inclined to see it more as a human than a machine.

 

 

 

They really missed the boat on this one...Shawn could have been kidnapped earlier on, 100+ years earlier, and could be an android with his human brain so he remained the same "person".

 

 

Edited January 29, 2016 by Evil D

[Klipperken]

There is the question: what is life, what is existence?

 

Star Trek - The Measure of a Man: Lt. Data has to prove whether he's alive or not.
Data, y'all know the awesome android that so desperately wants to become a man, is being debated upon if he is alive or not.
The question rose: just what is life?

Data meets most, if not all, requirements to be seen as alive, however...
He can be turned on and off by a flip of a switch.

 

BSG new series *shivers*:

The latest models (the Numbered) are basically human in all forms, with a tad of technology (remember when Six her spine lit up when she 'wrestled' Baltar?).
But there were a few of these toasters that were not even aware of what they were.
Now, that, of course, is not of value, but the fact that they performed as humans, actually being humans, never proven otherwise by others, what does that tell us?

Is a machine merely a machine, or could it become alive?

 

FO4 Synths: These are made (later gens) out of biological matter, which would further than still points towards life, just as with the Cylons.
Would it be justified to kill a Synth?
Sure, there can be so many reasons that could justify killing a Synth.
But should we pull them all over the same line?

I think, the situation has to be taken in thought here, see them as per individual.
But, that's my thoughts about it....

And even today, some are married with a car, or a... toy... :tongue:
So why not a synth?

 

 

 

Something I noticed is completely missing from this game is the use of human brains in robots like in past games. If a synth had a human brain, I would be far more inclined to see it more as a human than a machine.

 

 

 

They really missed the boat on this one...Shawn could have been kidnapped earlier on, 100+ years earlier, and could be an android with his human brain so he remained the same "person".

 

 

Well, why would a technological brain be of less quality than a human brain?

Edited January 29, 2016 by Klipperken

[TheOriginalEvilD]

There is the question: what is life, what is existence?

 

Star Trek - The Measure of a Man: Lt. Data has to prove whether he's alive or not.

Data, y'all know the awesome android that so desperately wants to become a man, is being debated upon if he is alive or not.

The question rose: just what is life?

Data meets most, if not all, requirements to be seen as alive, however...

He can be turned on and off by a flip of a switch.

 

BSG new series *shivers*:

The latest models (the Numbered) are basically human in all forms, with a tad of technology (remember when Six her spine lit up when she 'wrestled' Baltar?).

But there were a few of these toasters that were not even aware of what they were.

Now, that, of course, is not of value, but the fact that they performed as humans, actually being humans, never proven otherwise by others, what does that tell us?

Is a machine merely a machine, or could it become alive?

 

FO4 Synths: These are made (later gens) out of biological matter, which would further than still points towards life, just as with the Cylons.

Would it be justified to kill a Synth?

Sure, there can be so many reasons that could justify killing a Synth.

But should we pull them all over the same line?

 

I think, the situation has to be taken in thought here, see them as per individual.

But, that's my thoughts about it....

 

And even today, some are married with a car, or a... toy... :tongue:

So why not a synth?

 

 

 

Something I noticed is completely missing from this game is the use of human brains in robots like in past games. If a synth had a human brain, I would be far more inclined to see it more as a human than a machine.

 

 

 

They really missed the boat on this one...Shawn could have been kidnapped earlier on, 100+ years earlier, and could be an android with his human brain so he remained the same "person".

 

 

Well, why would a technological brain be of less quality than a human brain?

 

Because until science proves otherwise, the brain is where YOU extend from. You can have every other part of your body replaced, but as long as your brain remains unchanged, YOU are YOU. The brain is where consciousness and intellect exists, which as far as humans are concerned is what makes us human, it's what separates us from apes. If synths had human brains, it would make the argument much more difficult, since it could be argued that somewhere within that brain, the original owner still existed. If there is such a thing as a soul, it has to live within the brain. Where else? The heart? People have those transplanted all the time...do they lose their soul in the process? Do they lose their identity? Their self awareness? No, it's all in the brain.

 

Why is a human brain better than a technological brain? Because the human brain CREATED the technological one. Every single thing the computer brain knows, the human brain told it. We created the means for the computer brain to exist in the first place. Even if the computer brain is more capable of processing data etc etc etc, it wouldn't exist without the human brain. A computer brain only knows what we allow it to know. The consciousness that synths think they have is nothing more than a program. It doesn't have self awareness unless we program it to know what self awareness is.

 

The CPU powering the computer that I'm typing on is smarter than me in a thousand different ways. It can process data that I could only dream of. But, my brain has the ABILITY to process a near infinite amount of data and do so far faster than any processor we know of, and I can turn off this PC and unplug that processor and smash it with a hammer. Because I created it. (well, you know, put together the PC anyway).

 

If man was indeed created by a God or some higher power, then we are to that God as synths are to humans. No matter how far we reach, no matter how far we advance, we will never surpass that God, and synths will never surpass humans no matter how close they get. That's the relationship between a creator and the created.

Edited January 29, 2016 by Evil D