My Name is Mike

In his last blog, James talked about Mike and Robert Heinlein’s portrayal of artificial intelligence in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. He discussed the limited social skills that accompany artificial intelligence and the negative consequences that may result from the lack of these skills. I want to further deliberate on this point. If a computer is not human, how can it be humane?

Mike participates in revolution, a social activity unique to humans. As far as I know, other mammals and creatures do not lead revolutions. But if revolution is unique to humans, how does an entity that cannot think like a human consciously participate in one? I believe that even though Mike is involved with Luna’s revolution, he is not a conscious participant; he can carry out actions but is not fully aware of their consequences. He knows that people may die, but he cannot possibly understand human death because he lacks the mentality of a human. True, he experiences emotions, such as loneliness, and he behaves like a human, playing jokes and behaving whimsically, but I do not believe that he can understand the full range of human emotions or completely understand what it is to be alive. Manuel ponders over this point throughout the book: “Am not going to argue whether a machine can “really” be alive, “really” be self-aware” (12). He believes that Mike woke up, he became self-aware, and while I agree with this point, I do not believe he understands the value of a human life. At one point Manuel says that he believes that while he, the professor, and Wyoh have to die, immortality may be an option for Mike.

Could this lack of understanding of life breed carelessness? I agree with James that the portrayal of artificial intelligence in the novel is to a certain extent, frightening. Having entities that can kill people without understanding the value of life and just the numbers, is like putting smart-bombs on an automatic time to be dropped on another country every 30 minutes. It is scary!

Orson Scott Card’s computer character in the Ender’s Game series, Jane, is similar to Heinlein’s Mike. She seems to not only display, but truly understand a number of different human emotions, loyalty, jealousy, love, but I do not believe that she understands the value of a human life. Her participation in the planet’s revolt is for Ender’s sake and Miro’s sake, for their companionship, not because she desires freedom. Although Jane seems to have a greater understanding of human emotions and value life more than Mike, I still doubt she can comprehend it in its entirety. Heinlein and Card present future possibilities for technology, the creation of artificial intelligence. But I believe that Heinlein’s portrayal of artificial intelligence can be perceived as a warning against endowing with self-awareness an entity that cannot understand the value of life.