SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the some-topics-are-just-too-weird-for-words dept.
The folks over at CNBC have dug up some experts to explore the question should you have sex with robots:
Should we be having sex with robots?
It's a question that has sparked fierce debate among moralists and the robotics industry. And it turns out, they're all split on what role machines should play in future relationships.
During a discussion at the Web Summit technology conference in Dublin on Wednesday, experts warned about the dangers of getting intimate with robots.
"It's something we should be very concerned about...because if people feel they can have an intimate relationship with a machine, that is saying something serious about how we're experiencing empathy with each other," Kathleen Richardson, senior research fellow in the ethics of robotics at the U.K.'s De Montfort University, said during the panel.
The academic, who launched the "campaign against sex robots" earlier this year, added that "we are losing our sense of humanity."
How, exactly, do you get to be an expert on banging robots? Just saying...
(Score: 2) by Geotti on Sunday November 08 2015, @11:23AM
Autoerotic acts are a bit different than tantric ecstasy. If these bots could provide that...
(Score: 1) by Francis on Sunday November 08 2015, @04:04PM
Which they can't because you can't do tantra without a ton of work. A robot isn't likely to ever be able to do something like that. Most people will never be able to do that because of the years or work it takes before that point.
(Score: 2) by Geotti on Wednesday November 11 2015, @08:43PM
they can't because you can't do tantra without a ton of work
I can pop some acid and when happening in the right conditions, all of the work happens by itself (with the necessary effort) and the experience is divine.
(Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday November 11 2015, @10:33PM
No, you can't. Drugs are bad 'mkay.
I get freaking tired of people saying bullshit like that. That the drugs are helping them to be creative or that they're a substitute for legitimate spiritual development. Yes, some cultures used things like peyote at times for ceremonial purposes, but it was never a replacement for spiritual growth or work. It was a tool used within a framework.
(Score: 2) by Geotti on Friday November 13 2015, @12:10AM
And I get tired of people insisting that you have to rape your mental capacities by "training hard for a lifetime" or submit to some dubious guru or whatnot to achieve epiphany instead of finding your own way.
it was never a replacement for spiritual growth or work.
We definitely agree on this point. And I didn't say acid's not a tool for spiritual development, just like a hammer is for getting a nail in the wall.
Yes, years of meditative training is a tool too, and the experience might be more sustainable if you so desire, but it's also possible to sustain the experience using other tools. (Unfortunately, you usually end up being called a schizophrenic in western cultures. ;) )
Quite a lot of cultures use entheogens as a tool, including in Tantra:
A number of techniques (sadhana) are used as aids for meditation and achieving spiritual power:[...]
Use of taboo substances such as alcohol, cannabis, meat and other entheogens.[...]
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantra#Sadhanas)
Mh'key? good.
some cultures used things like peyote at times for ceremonial purposes
(You expose your origin with this statement.) All over the world people (i.e. priests, shamans, etc.) used whatever was available to them. In Latin America san pedro and peyote was used (amongst others) but there's also agaric -to come back to the Indian area-, which was possibly the soma [wikipedia.org] of the Rig Veda, but definitely used ritualistically northwards towards Siberia.
No, you can't.
How the fuck do you know? I know what I've experienced, friend. :)