Galatea


In the end, how did Galatea end life support for Portia without violating the first law of robotics? Was it 'not harm' since she didn't want to live without Andrew?

"A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm."

I'm a nerd for noticing this, but there you go.



In episode 2F09, when Itchy plays Scratchy's skeleton like a xylophone, he strikes the same rib twice in succession, yet he produces two clearly different tones. I mean, what are we to believe, that this is some sort of a [the three nerds chuckle] magic xylophone or something? Boy, I really hope somebody got fired for that blunder.

reply

The only good explanation I could think of was that Oliver Platt hacked her and she is no longer subject to the laws.

If anyone has proof that the Idiocracy isn't upon us please show me.

reply

That scene culminates what was my biggest complaint with the movie. It does put enough emphasis on the three laws. In Asimov books, everything decision a robot makes is rooted in the three laws. It is a robot's morality. It does not matter what a human orders a robot to do, the First Law prevents a robot from killing a human.

One view is that Galatea is now indiviualized. So why did Portia ORDER her to pull the switch? She could have asked politely. The idea that Galatea (still a robot) decided that a sentient being like Portia was better off dead is downright scary, even if Portia herself felt that way. Portia was obviously suffering from depression induced from the loss of Andrew.

reply

Portia was obviously suffering from depression
Yep... exactly like most of "Dr. Death's" victims, and most others who've chosen 'assisted suicide'.

It's horrifying to think that most people believe irreversible death is a better choice than living in pain, where there's a definite possibility of improvement. Yeah, let's make a permanent decision based on a temporary feeling! Good idea!!!


The Doctor is out. Far out.

reply

Thank God Galatea (whether robot or not at that time) perceived what many humans do not, as illustrated here in this thread and in life generally: that the most evil harm that can be done to a human is to deny them the choice to allow their natural death to proceed when their time has come.

reply

the most evil harm that can be done to a human is to deny them the choice to allow their natural death to proceed when their time has come.

Oh, sure, that's the WORST thing ever you can do to someone. Living is sooooo much worse than death.

Geez...


The Doctor is out. Far out.

reply

So people don't have the right to choose. How civilized?

reply

Was Galatea the girl robot he met earlier in the movie but now fully upgraded to be just like Andrew? Would explain the free will and all.

reply

...a possible side implication could be that in the world of 2205 humans have absolute right and control over their lives in the subject of euthanasia, and Portia to have her life extended was probably as robotic and artificial as Andrew was human.
Portia does request to be 'turned off' which I thought was an interesting choice of words & Galatea presses one single giant red button

reply

I've got a different take on this. To put it in perspective, let me quote the 3 Laws of Robotics:

1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2) A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

Momentarily, we'll suspend talking about Galatea, and examine Andrew. Andrew has, in a sense, violated Rule 3, by allowing himself to grow old and die. He was not ordered to do so. He was presented a moral choice, both by the World Congress and to a lesser extent by Portia, but he was not ordered by any human to make a specific choice. However, this illustrates that he has transcended being "just" a robot and has indeed become human, perhaps not completely corporally, but the spirit of Andrew is his being human, flawed and all.

Returning to Galatea, her appearance up through the time when Andrew decides to change to allow himself to grow old and die by "injecting" blood into his body, allowing it to begin to break down, is as a robot. Sometime between when that change occurs and when Andrew dies, Galatea has undergone a change from a "pure" robotic appearance to such that she can and is mistaken by the viewer, at first, for being a human nurse. It is easy, then, to postulate that not only her physical appearance has changed, but she has undergone many (perhaps all, but who is to know) of the changes that Andrew had undergone. Whether she has chosen to permit herself to grow old and die is unanswered, and unnecessary for this discussion. Instead, what does appear to have taken place is that she has been given that which is the most human of qualities, free will. She is now able to apply what she knows of the 3 laws and interpret that with her judgment, just as humans do, for now she is human herself. Therefore, she is not violating Rule 1 nor is she following Rule 2.

Yes, Portia does ORDER Galatea to unhook her from her life sustaining equipment. However, as Andrew even says, "Old habit. I started my existence as a robot, I still like to be told certain things." Similarly, Galatea may wish to (and Portia would know if Galatea had been their nurse for a long time) be told that it's an order, both for "completeness sake" and "old time's sake", as well as to ensure that this was not a snap judgment due to her feeling of loss, but that it was a firm commitment on Portia's part.

Just my 7 cents worth (much to long to just go for 2 cents worth) about the topic.

reply