Should we treat something like it had consciousness or reason when the actions of that entity suggests this as a possibility?

[noname223]

Can we really define what consciousness is? Can we ultimately define what reason is and who is capable of it? Is reason only a trait humans can have? And does reason define human beings? What about people with dementia or babies. They don't have reason or at least our understanding of it.

Of course this is part of the AI debate. Do with it what you want.

 

[Forever Sleep]

It seems like the safest/ most moral way to proceed. Of course, we don't and won't. Many animals display sentience, consciousness and an ability to make choices but- if we happen to like to eat them, keep them as pets or- if they annoy us- we either highly limit their autonomy or, we ignore it all together. We basically enslave all that we can around us- sentient/ conscious or not.

With regards to beings with limited or degraded mental competency- generally, I think the rule is to give them as much freedom as is safe for them to have. Obviously- you don't leave them around knives and things that could hurt them.

I worked in care work for a short while and, one of the things taught was to respect competency and, how far. So- some unwise decisions might be accepted- unhealthy living choices for example. But say- they want to sell their property and put it all on the lottery? I think then- there would be more opposition.

But, if we're simply not sure about how conscious/ sentient a being is- the safer path would surely be to assume it can think and possibly feel. That way, hopefully we won't abuse it.