麻豆传媒

HAVE you ever imagined what it would be like to have sex with a robot? David Levy sure has. In his new book, he predicts that sleeping with robots will eventually become as commonplace as sleeping with other humans. Indeed, we鈥檒l find it preferable, he says, largely because of the robots鈥� supreme love-making prowess. In the robot age it will, apparently, be quite normal for couples to own two robots 鈥� a malebot and a fembot 鈥� and for them to 鈥渆njoy orgiastic sessions in which three or all four of them take part鈥�.

Levy seems deadly serious about all this, unless his new book is some elaborate fantasy 鈥� he is, after all, president of the International Computer Games Association. His expertise is artificial intelligence and not, it seems, human relationships. His enthusiasm for the carnal aspects of robotics leads him so often into the absurd that it鈥檚 hard to take his arguments seriously. That is unfortunate, because the idea behind the book 鈥� a world in which robots appear to be just like us 鈥� is fascinating. It raises important questions about the future of robots, what we might want from them and what our interactions with them might teach us about ourselves.

Take, for example, the idea of a robot as a romantic partner 鈥� not as far-fetched as it might seem, given how people today project emotional qualities onto toys, objects and machines. It seems we cannot help but experience an emotional response to certain signals, even if we know full well that the signaller is not sentient (麻豆传媒, 28 July 2007, p 46).

鈥淲e cannot help but experience an emotional response to certain signals鈥�

This raises the question: if your partner appeared entirely human, would it matter if he or she was actually a robot? If you suddenly discovered that your boyfriend鈥檚 cognition was rooted in silicon and steel rather than biochemistry, would it change anything? Some AI experts think not. Ultimately, they argue, human reactions are just as mechanistic as a robot鈥檚, except that the triggers are biochemical. We may never know the difference. This thought horrifies some sociologists, such as Sherry Turkle, who warn of the dangers this seductive technology could heap on human interactions. What happens to love, family and moral conscience if people prefer robots to humans?

That wouldn鈥檛 bother Levy one bit; indeed, he seems to favour it. One can鈥檛 help wondering why Levy is so down on human relationships. He dedicates his book to 鈥淎nthony, an MIT student who tried having girlfriends but found that he preferred relationships with computers. And to all the other Anthonys past, present and future, of both sexes.鈥� There鈥檚 something tragic in that.

In a few decades, Levy believes, we鈥檒l be able to program robots to provide all the good stuff of relationships without the bad. If that sounds too good to be true, it probably is. What Levy doesn鈥檛 acknowledge is that such a relationship would be unlike anything we now know: how can he be so sure that we would enjoy it? Robot love could be dull, unfulfilling or just plain weird. Empathy and trust 鈥� key ingredients in any relationship 鈥� are built on a sense of what we share with one another. The knowledge that our 鈥減erfect鈥� partner is battery powered might turn out to matter more than Levy seems to think.

What鈥檚 more, his assumption that we will be able to engineer robots that display positive emotions or ways of thinking without the negative aspects and yet still seem human requires a huge leap of faith. Based on our current knowledge of the way emotions work, it sounds like wishful thinking.

Love and Sex with Robots provokes all kinds of questions about consciousness and emotions, about how we recognise ourselves in others and about the extent to which behaviour reflects the mechanics of the mind. Unfortunately, Levy fails to explore them. Like a typical human, he鈥檚 got one thing on his mind, albeit with a twist.

Robots 鈥� Learn more about the robotics revolution in our continually updated .