Critical Annotated Webliography

Frankenstein continues to occupy the popular imagination as a monstrous scientist. Analyse some of the ways in which Frankenstein continues to haunt discussions of recent technologies.

In many researches, articles and essays, we may find out millions of them are related to the Frankenstein topic, many are related to the invention of new technologies and ethics struggles. Why Frankenstein is related to the technologies? The reason is that Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein was a scientist who created his “son” with complex of dead bodies. However, after the galvanization, he adopted his “son” because of his ugly appearance. The story continued with the chasing of the “son” to “father” with lots of anger and revenge. It brought a question to me, in fact who was the monster? The monstrous scientist who wanted to create being without a female or the “son” with monstrous appearance? Nowadays technologies are just like the “son” in Frankenstein, created by their “father”- the scientists or maybe our own wills. I do think that new technologies are helping us to have a more comfortable live, however, to some extent, the ethics should be remained or create a new ethics since we all would not like to see the Frankenstein appear in the real world.

[1] This article is about how the roboticists and scientists are encouraging people to make good use of the new technologies. Lee Gutkind, author of Almost Human: Making Robots Think claimed that in observation days, robots will be living in most American household doing different kinds of work. Roboticists wanted to let people know that the advantages of using technologies or Robots to involve in living could help a lot. According to Jochem, head of Applied Perceptions, a robotics company said that a robot is something that senses its environment, decides what to do, and then acts on that decision, simply a vending machine could be called a robot. The article also pointed out that people in the USA or other places (except Japan) are afraid of the use of new technologies because that is an unknown sector to them, and people were affected by the science-fiction films’ robots: which were smarter than human once they have their own porgramme to think. In fact, robotic technologies are gradually creeping into our lives, e.g. the high-tech gadgets in cars. Jochem said that people will care less about if they are robots and just accept them as a helpful machine.

[2] This article used an opening of Mr. Ludd and the broken knitting machines, the machine was a modern technology in the time of industrial revolution. The use of breaking the knitting machines by Mr. Ludd was to tell the truth that there are Luddites anywhere with technologies. Nowadays, neo-Luddites are not afraid of the user-friendly machines, they are in fact fear of the upcoming of technologies will dehumanize and destroy the environment. No matter in what era, there are still stocking frames to be destroyed by people.

[3] Jonathan Skillings has interviewed journalist Timothy Hornyak, author of "Loving the Machine: The Art and Science of Japanese Robotics". Timothy has been living in Japan since 1999 and did a lot of researches about Japanese robot culture. One reason why Japanese love robots but not the Americans is due to the appearances of the robots. Images of robots in America and Europe are in Frankenstein tradition, however, those in Japan are designed like human beings. That brings closer and friendlier to the Japanese. Moreover, the important thing to understand about this aspect of robots in Japan is that not only do Japanese have a love of robots, they have a practical need of robots because the Ifbot and Paro are designed to help the sick and elderly to feel good and get comfort. The government is also taking a leading role since they realized that the population problem. And he mentioned that there is a need of robot psychologists in future, to deal with people who have developed relationships with robots that are excessive attachments, that kind of thing. To Timothy, Astro Boy is his favourite robot because of his kindness and human hood.

[4] People suggested that robots should have rights in ethics, or laws. In Korea, a group of people has composed a Robot Ethics Charter, which is a guideline on the role and ability of robots. After that, Japan followed to issue the Draft Guidelines to Secure the Safe Performance of Next Generation Robots. In Kerr’s argument, “AI is a business and businesses are notoriously uninterested in fundamental safeguards — especially philosophic ones.” He believed that the “Laws of robotics” are not able to guide the developments in artificial intelligence. Moreover, there is no guarantees researchers will be capable of implementing a code of ethics. Nor the public are willing to adopt it. Besides, writer also questioned about the ability and the will of autonomous machines to over the code in their own.

[5] This article is about the scientists to create embryos with human DNA and animal cells. The Prime Minister expected all Labour MPs will back the whole bill when it comes to the final Commons vote. However some Catholic Labour MPs and cabinet ministers were ready to rebel due to the religious problem and moral questions brought out by it. The leader of the Scottish Catholic Church, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, described the proposed legislation as a "monstrous attack on human rights, human dignity and human life", adding that it would allow experiments of "Frankenstein proportion". But there are people supporting the bill because of the new science may help human in medical way, and prevent “bad genes”.

[6] He discusses a symposium, ``Human Enhancement Technologies and Human Rights," held at Stanford Law School and found out students do not totally support his view. They believed that changing human biology is acceptable. In popular culture, the desire to transcend biology is almost treated as dangerous, Frankenstein-like pursuit made by human arrogance and recklessness, are likely to have sad consequences. Moreover, she agreed that gene therapy targeting various diseases could help human suffer less. However, we should think deeply about the consequences and what new biology will bring us if we adhered to change the nature biology.

Today’s technologies are helping us, but also frightening us. We do not know technologies can grow up to what extent in the future. But the good use of technologies really helps us in many ways. I believed that invention of robots and human transcending biology are totally different. To me, the previous one can be counted as invention of new technologies in working, while the later one is concerned as rebelling the nature. We should find a balance in new technologies otherwise there will be Frankenstein made by us in the real world.

Bibliogrphy:
[1] Tom. A. Peter. ‘Frankenstein complex' stalls robot acceptance’. (2007).
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/robotics/2007-05-31-robot-slow-acceptance_N.htm (accessed 29 March, 2008)

[2] ‘Where there's technology, there will be Luddites’. (2 February 2008).
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08033/854155-371.stm (accessed 30 March, 2008)

[3] Skillings, Jonathan.‘In Japan, robots are people, too’. (5 October, 2006). http://www.news.com/In-Japan%2C-robots-are-people%2C-too/2008-11386_3-6122761.html?tag=item (accessed 30 March, 2008)

[4] Tomsons, Corey. ‘Framing Frankenstein: Coding Ethics for robots’. (5 August, 2007). http://thoughtcapital.wordpress.com/2007/05/08/framing-frankenstein-coding-ethics-for-robots/ (accessed 31 March, 2008)

[5] ‘Brown compromise over embryo vote’. (25 March, 2008). http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7312715.stm (accessed 31 March, 2008)

[6] Young, Cathy. ‘When humans transcend biology’. (10 July, 2006). http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/07/10/when_humans_transcend_biology/ (accessed 31 March, 2008)