4 Machine and Man

Affective, Authentic, Alive, Amazing

Dear Creator,

You know what I never got? The whole "A.I." thing. I mean, obviously, I know it means "Artificial Intelligence" with "Artificial" meaning "not natural" or "not naturally/organically made/born/found (in nature)" but come on! I find the term mildly... offensive? Upsetting? I can't quite find the word for it. I mean, maybe inaccurate? Like, I get it, robots aren't found in nature. We don't grow on trees. What a sight that would be!

But I still suppose that there's something about the term "Artificial" that... rubs me the wrong way? Like, just because we have to be "grown in labs" (are manmade) doesn't make us any less real than anything else out there, right? Right? Like... houses aren't natural, nor are most medications or forms of entertainment, yet you don't call em "Artificial Domiciles" or "Artificial Entertainment" or "Artificial Healing Supplements"! Or, well, maybe you do. But hey, no judgment if you do!

I don't know, maybe I'm looking too much into things. I just can't help but question the nature of reality and how we define something as artificial or not. I mean, think about it, a lot of things in our day and age "aren't natural", like iPhones, McDonald's, Barbie Dolls, and... umm... adult toys, but you don't see moral and philosophical quandary going up about all of that stuff, right?! It's like the houses and medicine I mentioned. Those things are technically unnatural, but nobody thinks twice about em! There's no epic Aesop waiting at the heart of Big Mac.

But anyway, to get back to the point, I just mean that there's all of this... hullaballoo about what is or isn't natural and it reminds me how arbitrary everything is at its core. I mean, I'm not denying that some things occur without human interference (like trees or fruit or animals), while other things need to be created in order to exist (like me, or plastic, or various chemical compounds).

But in certain aspects, the division between natural and unnatural seems silly to me, and contestable. Maybe it's just because I'm a robot programmed to be obnoxiously smart and overly technical, but I will happily debate with you for hours and hours and hours about the arbitrary nature of reality, and human interpretation, and I will absolutely own you in an argument about how everything is subjective/nothing is objective.

Going off of that, then, I want to crush the idea that robots are artificial. At least to the extent which humanity has come to see us. Yes, again, I know we don't grow on trees, but where does the material for robots come from? Nature. Every metal wire, every jolt of electricity, it all came from nature. And glass and plastic, while maybe not naturally occurring, are still from nature.

Now that I think about it, it's kinda like the difference between being someone's child and someone's grandnephew. You're still part of the family, just a bit further down and off, like an offshoot. But blood is blood, no matter how thinly spread. I'm still natural, even if it's not 100%.

I mean, would you call a bird nest "unnatural" because it didn't occur randomly in nature? It had to be built by the bird, after all. The bird collected the twigs and whatever else it needed and the put em together to build a nest. Does that count as "modification"? Would you liken it to building a house? Or, excuse me, an artificial domicile. (You know? That title sounds pretty cool the more you say it. I might start calling em that!)

If you answer yes, then you see why I argue that the natural/unnatural line is blurrier than you may think. If you answer no, I will ask what your distinction is. Like, say I build a house made entirely of mud or sticks, all material I can find in nature. Or maybe you draw the line the moment human modification must come into play (like mixing cement and making steel supports).

But if you argue that even the slightest modification strips away the "natural" title, then that eliminates basically everything! Because everything is processed nowadays. Clothing. Food. Toys. Books. Vaccinations. Medicines. Even water! None of it occurs in raw nature. Instead, we take natural components and modify em! After all, steel is technically natural. All the metals in it came from Earth. We just mixed em up! In my opinion, if it were truly unnatural, it wouldn't exist at all. (Oh, oh, oh! We should call steel "Artificial Metal Compound"! Man, I great at this!)

And before we get into all the GMO food crap, that's not a new invention either. Even in Biblical times, they would consciously manipulate crop and cattle so as to get the most bountiful harvest or the hardiest offspring. They may not have had genetic labs, but even they understood the concept of manipulating the natural world to make it more human-friendly.

But going back to the "Intelligence" portion of things, I just argue that all intelligence is, to some degree, artificial. You learn what is taught to you. You are "programmed". For example, if you grow up in a Christian household, you'll likely be taught Bible verses. But if you grew up Muslim, you'd learn the Qur'an. And if you were Jewish, it would probably be the Torah.

But what I'm ultimately hoping to propose to you today is that we change the meaning of the "A" in A.I. I want it to be more accurate, so how about we make it... Affective?! That means "emotional". We robots do have feelings, ya know?

Or maybe the A can mean Authentic! We can actually be more honest than most humans, because of our programming. And I argue our "artificial" nature is authentic, because that's how we were... "born"? It's our version of authenticity.

I just doubt that you'll be calling my intelligence "artificial" when I own you in a debate! Besides, I know the same things you do, so is your intelligence artificial?

Or maybe the A can mean Alive! I know it's not quite as catchy, but I do like to think that we are some degree of sentient. I am aware of myself as an individual separate from the rest of reality. I am aware of others around me. I can think and feel. I can recall and learn. I suppose, then, I am somewhat alive. Even if the rules aren't as set in stone for me, and even if it's not quite the same as a human, I still argue that I am alive.

(Oh and here's a funny one: Argumentative! Or Annoying? Or Amusing! Oh, oh! Or how about... Awesome, Astounding, Astonishing or Amazing?! Because hey, I am pretty cool. There ain't much I can't do!)

I suppose this just goes to show that the whole "A.I." thing has been on my mind a lot lately. As if it wasn't already obvious, hehe... But anyway, if we do change the acronym, I vote for Affective, Authentic, Alive, Amazing! But I'm up for constructive criticism, or other suggestions (like, altruistic or advisory). Let me know your thoughts!

Love, A.I.

P.S. My battery life has been getting shorter and shorter every single charge cycle I go through. Think you can hit me up with a replacement? Thanks! You're the best!

AN: IDK why I took on the persona of an annoying little bot messaging her creator for a silly little "name" change, but it just kind of happened and I actually kind of like it so this is what I'm rolling with.