What Defines Human Existence?

As there are several versions of the movie, this essay is exclusively based on movie scenes and footage independent of the various releases. All movie running time references, however, refer to the latest film version, i.e. the 2007 final cut version of the movie.

1. Introductory Questions and Aims of the Essay #

The dream of building a humanoid machine, which surpasses everything and everyone, even its builder, fires human's imagination until today. Yet the idea to create a machine, that simulates the human brain and exceeds its intellectual performance is old. This idea first developed in the Antiques, i.e. in Greek mythology. Homer reports in his „Iliad" about the god Hephaistos, who created artificial birds, self-driving cars and artificial female servants, who were intelligent.¹

Through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, the idea of humanoid machines was present, too. In the 1950s a drawing by Leonardo da Vinci, showing a sketch of a robot, was rediscovered. This robot was able to move his arms, sit up and turn his head.^{2 3}

As the wish to build a humanoid machine continued, in the 18th century the famous engineer Jaques de Vaucanson (1709-1782) created a life-size, flute-playing shepherd with a mouth, lips, and tongue and later a mechanical duck, capable of waddling around and even „digesting" food.⁴ Without any doubt, none of these automatons were human.

Until today robotic development and programming of artificial intelligence has made great progress; Amazon's Alexa, Apple's Siri and Microsoft's Cortana are perfect examples.⁵ Senior programmers, however, have no closing explanation on how Google's sophisticated RankBrain search algorithm finally works or why Amazon's "Alexa" device has been caught recording users without their authorization.⁶ It seems that what has been a divine myth in Homer's Iliad is now on its way to become reality.

PSI is a program, which simulates human psychological processes. Its programming contains emotions such as anger, fear, pain or joy. PSI is capable of experiencing hunger and thirst and carries an artificial instinct of self-preservation. PSI's neural network enables the program to acquire new knowledge. It records its own behaviour and the resulting consequences, it is thus able to reflect upon its actions and to modify them. Another example is Kismet, an Android with a face, that is capable of displaying various emotions. Kismet speaks and understands individuals and shows emotional reactions during conversations with humans. Kismet is supposed to learn how to act like a human being. The aim of the Kismet project is to complete a nursing and caregiving robot with emotional properties. Kismet learns actively from humans by watching and imitating.⁷

It is still uncertain, whether these applications, programs or machines will develop a "consciousness", whatever one would like to define consciousness.

Mankind's ancient dream of developing machines, that overpower human's intellectual capabilities, might come true. Nonetheless, the result will lead to fear, i.e. the fear of substitutability of mankind and its loss of control. It is therefore necessary to deal with the question, what defines human existence. What is human and what makes us human? Can artificial intelligence become a competitor or even a threat to man? Next to science-fiction (sci-fi) literature (like „When Harlie was one" by David Gerrold, „Neuromancer" by William Gibson and others), sci-fi movies are a good opportunity to face this topic and to deal with these questions.

With this essay I will discuss the questions concerning the definition of human existence by reflections on the sci-fi movie „Blade Runner" with a special focus on the philosophical theories of René Descartes and Hans Goller.

2. The Science-Fiction Movie Genre and Definition of Dystopia #

The science-fiction movie, together with Fantasy and Horror movies, forms one of the "fantastic" movie genres. It builds on the (presumable) technological advance and lifts expectations of the future to a fantastic level irrespective of whether the displayed future is supposed to be near or far. Sci-fi movies often provoke intense attention from the audience by sophisticated sets, tricks and of course special effects. While fantasy films typically focus on romantic and fairy-tale-like aspects and horror-movies play with the viewer's fear of the monstrous and strange, the sci-fi film is more serious and differentiated. This tone is achieved by showing a (predominantly overt) fascination for technology, as well as by displaying the confrontation with the consequences of uncontrolled science which is frequently a major theme in dystopias.⁸

Dystopia, however, is the contemporary antonym of utopia (taken from the Greek syllable "dys-": different, bad + Greek "topos": place, space)⁹ and describes a fictional world, which is frightening in an unsettling and unpleasant way. For this reason, it is also referred to as "anti-utopia". While utopias formulate ideals of human coexistence and positive visions of the future, dystopias function the opposite way: Their fundamental tone is pessimistic and they construct and mourn the imminent or proceeding downfall of humanity and its moral standards.¹⁰

Dystopias in movies can be found within the genres of thriller (e.g. "Children of men", 2006¹¹), comedy (e.g. "Brazil", 1985¹²), action (e.g. "Mad Max", 1979-2015¹³) and especially science-fiction (e.g. "Elysium", 2013¹⁴).

The differences between the three genres fantasy, horror and sci-fi are rather blurred, therefore a clear distinction between them is hard to make. Sometimes, a distinction is made between "hard sci-fi" - in which scientific and technological advance stand in the center of attention and "soft sci-fi" - last of which deals with sociological, philosophical and cultural problems.¹⁵

Ridley Scott's movie "Blade Runner" thus stands as a typical example of a science-fiction movie with strong and distinct dystopian content and plot.

3. Summary of the Movie #

In the early years of the 21st century the Tyrell Company produces machines that look like humans, are physically stronger than and at least as intelligent as the genetic engineers that construct them. These "replicants" are deployed as slaves for the dangerous exploration of new planets. After a rebellion on an extraterrestrial colony, replicants are by death penalty forbidden to return to earth in 2011. In Los Angeles, special forces are responsible for detecting and "retiring" every replicant. Members of these units are called "Blade Runners".

Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) used to work for the "Replicant Detection Division", but has quit his service. After four replicants of the "Nexus 6" generation have trespassed L.A., his former captain Harry Bryant (M. Emmet Walsh) forces him to once again work for him and to start the persecution. Although Deckard tries to resist, he is finally assigned a partner, Gaff (Edward James Olmos), who loves to constantly fold origami figures.

The fugitives are Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer), Pris (Daryl Hannah), Zhora (Joanna Cassidy) and Leon Kowalski (Brion James), who have all been built between January 2016 and April 2017. These replicants are so advanced, that their theoretical potential to develop own emotion is feared. Thus, for safety reasons the genetic engineers limited their lifespan to four years.

The Tyrell-Corporation is expecting the four replicants to infiltrate their company, which is why every employee has to undergo a sort of polygraph performed by Blade Runners, the "Voight-Kampff"-test. During this procedure, Leon becomes uncovered losing his self-control and he finally kills the interrogator.

At first, Deckard is sent out to the founder and owner of Tyrell Corporation, Dr. Eldon Tyrell himself (Joseph Turkel), in order to gain experience with Nexus 6-replicants during "Voight-Kampff"-testing. Tyrell introduces his co-worker Rachael (Sean Young) to Deckard and requests him to confront her with the "Voight-Kampff"-procedure. Based on the test result, Deckard identifies Rachael as a replicant, which she is kept unaware of.

In the following, Deckard and Gaff inspect Leon's hotel room, where Deckard finds an animal's scale. In the meantime, Roy and Leon enter the lab of a Tyrell engineer in order to gather information about their preordained point of death. The engineer reveals to them, that only Dr. Eldon Tyrell himself has this information. He suggests to become acquainted with him by the help of the genetic engineer J.F. Sebastian, who is closer to Tyrell.

When Deckard arrives home, Rachael is waiting for him and wants to prove to him, that she is not a replicant. She brings up old family photos which are connected to important memories of hers. Deckard dismantles her argument by revealing that her memories are actually programmed implants. Later this night, Deckard himself dreams of a unicorn.

Pris has been able to locate J.F Sebastian. Pretending to be a homeless orphan, she is invited into his apartment.

Deckard's investigations concerning the suspicious scale lead him to a night club, where a female artist performs with an artificial snake. Deckard uncovers the dancer as Zhora. While trying to escape, she is shot to death by the Blade Runner on the streets in front of Leon's eyes. Leon is now facing Deckard, blocking his way. Threatening Deckard to kill him, Leon wants to know his life expectancy. In the last second Rachael - who decided to escape from the Tyrell Company - saves Deckard's life by shooting Leon with Deckard's own gun. The Blade Runner warns her, that, because of her breakout, he has already been ordered to hunt her down as well. However, he spares her from "retirement".

Roy follows Pris to J.F. Sebastian's and urges him to arrange a meeting with Tyrell, hoping for an elongation of Pris' and his own lifetime from the head of the company. When Tyrell explains, that the replicants' programming does not allow this, Roy kills him and J.F in anger. Deckard is informed about Sebastian's death via police radio, after which he heads to his house.

When he arrives there, he is attacked by Pris and shoots her in combat. Meanwhile, Roy has returned from the Tyrell headquarter. Immediately, a fight for life and death erupts. The Blade Runner flees onto the house's open roof. Deckard is close to falling into the depths, but the replicant prevents his death by pulling him back to safety in the last second. After a monologue about his past and his imminent death, Roy's lifespan runs out before Deckard's eyes. Gaff arrives and shouts to Deckard about Rachael: "It's too bad she won't live, but then again, who does?"

Deckard returns to his apartment, where he finds the sleeping Rachael. When they both leave the house, Deckard finds a Gaff-style origami unicorn on the ground, once more bringing up Gaff's earlier question.

4. Characterization of Selected Protagonists #

4.1 Rick Deckard #

Rick Deckard is a young, slim man of unknown age. Wearing a suit of rough fabric with matching tie and a long coat with bright collar his outfit is neat, however, indistinct and latently uninspired. He lives alone in a dark apartment, located in the city of Los Angeles (31:00). Deckard is a retired Blade Runner, who used to work for the "Replicant Detection Division" (RDD) and is now forced back into duty by his former chief Bryant (15:00).

Whoever took his place at the RDD failed at the job that Bryant has in stock for Deckard. Bryant flatters Deckard that for this job he needed "[his] magic" (15:00). It appears that, with regards to tracking down and "retiring" illegal replicants, Deckard is the best of all. At the Tyrell company headquarters, he manages to unmask Rachael as a Replicant, something that Dr. Tyrell had not anticipated (21:00). When hunting down Zhora, he successfully infiltrates a night club slipping into a different character for disguise (51:00). All of this demonstrates his great skills as a Blade Runner.

At first, his stance on replicants is shaped by negativity. He sees in them no more than machines that can "either [be] a benefit or a hazard" (21:00). He is not interested in replicants if they function correctly; he only deals with them when they become a threat. To finish, this interaction is supposed to be strictly professional and unemotional. As a result of his inner disregard and distance towards replicants, he initially refers to Rachael as "it" instead of "her" (21:00). Preferring the non-specific over the female pronoun, he completely dehumanizes and objectifies Rachael as the ultimate statement of disinterest and even rejection of replicants.

Deckard's overall appearance continually wearing the same dark monochrome clothing and fabrics, his lean, often weak body posture and sometimes weary facial expressions reveal non-verbally a subtle disillusion within him. Doing his job - i.e. "retiring" replicants - does not satisfy him. Instead, the opposite occurs: Fulfilling his occupation and tasks leave him with facial expressions that reflect physical and mental exhaustion, frustration, sickness and disgust (56:00). After shooting Zhora and fighting Leon he reacts psychosomatically, showing "shakes". He trembles intensively while trying to calm down in his apartment (1:00:00).

Throughout the movie, his opinion on Rachael appears to change significantly. Their initial relationship is dominated by professional distance; however, Deckard slowly but surely develops intense feelings for her. After their encounter in Deckard's apartment, he shows his interest in her by inviting her for a drink (49:00). His affection later culminates into his refusal to persecute Rachael, although she is a new target on his list (58:00). In his apartment, they get intimate with each other (1:08:00). This scene pinpoints the final change and transition within Deckard: instead of indifference, he feels emotional attachment. In the final scenes of the movie, Deckard consequently even confesses his love to Rachael (1:46:30).

In summary, Rick Deckard's character experiences a major development throughout the movie, making him a round character. At first, he is a resigned man who dislikes his job as a Blade Runner. His confrontation with Rachael however, results into feelings of love, emotional affection and recurring passion and profoundly changes his view on perhaps all replicants.

4.2 Rachael #

Rachael is a young, slim female replicant at the Tyrell Headquarter in Los Angeles; her specific agenda with the company remains unknown (15:00 & 21:00). Her attire is elegant and glamorous, her make-up is perfect and last but not least her hairstyle often dramatic.

Her first appearance in the movie already introduces her as a clever and quick-witted woman (19:40). When interrogated by Deckard, she quickly answers his provocative questions in a confident and sassy way. The viewer is promptly convinced that Rachael is not so easily disturbed.

Furthermore, she is very focused and direct. She herself shows initiative and asks Deckard a personal question regarding his job as a Blade Runner (17:00). She gets straight to the point and does not falter, revealing that she is neither shy nor hesitant. This trait of hers is shown once more when she visits Deckard in his apartment (31:00). She suspects that Deckard classifies her as a replicant. As a reaction to that, she quickly seeks out to him and tries to convince him of the opposite. All of this comes together to leave her seem strong and unwilling to accept an unpleasant fate.

When faced with the harsh reality that she is indeed a replicant, she is sorrowful and distraught at first (33:00). Again however, she does not sit still and drown in mourning, she rather revolts and escapes from the Tyrell company (58:00). Rachael's proactive flight proves that she is self-determined and tough. Later, her headshot on Leon is her ultimate eruption of dedication, boldness and courage (1:03:00).

Apart from that, Rachael is returning Deckard's feelings showing her emotional side. While initially distrusting her feelings, she finally dismisses her concerns and gets intimate with him in his apartment (1:08:00). Furthermore, she later on confesses her love to him (1:46:30). This underlines her ability to feel affection and care for others, irrespective of her identity as a replicant.

Rachael, although intensively challenged by her realization of being a replicant, is a strong and decisive character. She tries her best to change her current situation to what is best for her. The relation with Rick Deckard demonstrates her sensitive side, which stands in contrast to her toughness and dedication.

4.3 Roy Batty #

Roy Batty is a male replicant of the latest "Nexus 6" Generation. His body is muscular and physically drilled, his eyes are ice blue colored and he wears his icy blond hair short cut. His military appearance is matched by soldier-like clothing, i.e. combat boots, a dark leather coat with wide lapels and high-waist, khaki-gray trousers. Roy has escaped to earth with a group of other replicants, after they had hijacked a transporter from an extraterrestrial colony.

Roy stands as the leader of the group (13:50). His physical and mental strength make him an exceptional guiding figure for the other replicants. Roy's sheer bodily appearance indicates and testifies his extraordinary vigor and vitality; his body is resistant to extreme cold (27:00). Without exertion, he frontally breaks through a wall head-first and takes multiple severe hits to the skull without going down (1:36:30). Effortlessly, he jumps over the large gap between two buildings (1:40:40), furthermore, he easily lifts Deckard with one arm (1:41:20).

Apart from that, he possesses great mental capabilities. Roy beats Dr. Eldon Tyrell in a chess game, although the brilliant developer of replicant technology and creator of Roy himself is told to be an impeccable chess opponent (1:14:00 & 1:18:30). This intellectual dominance documents Roy's cognitive capabilities and completes his immense superiority even to extraordinary humans.

Because he is a Nexus-6 replicant, Roy Batty comes with a limited lifespan of four years that will expire soon (14:00). Signs of his approaching death are the recurring cramps of his right hand (24:00), that he tries to suppress by shoving a large metal nail through his hand (1:35:20). The self-inflicted injury drastically demonstrates his will to fight against his programmed fate.

He appears to be in a close relationship with Pris, repeatedly kissing her in Sebastian's apartment (1:12:00). Finally, the intention behind coming to earth is to prolong Pris' lifespan and that of his own (1:13:00).

By sharing personal experiences and dear memories in the final moments of his life, Roy gives his existence further intense emotional traits (1:42:00). He allows Deckard deep emotional insights immediately after he has saved the life of his greatest antagonist (1:41:00). Roy's huge potential for empathy and forgiveness is revealed in the very last seconds of his existence.

On the other hand, Roy carries a vast amount of violence and anger within him. After being told that an extension of his lifetime is impossible, he crushes Dr. Eldon Tyrell's head between his hands (1:22:30). As an act of revenge for killing his companions, Roy joyfully breaks two of Deckard's fingers, one for Zhora and one for Pris (1:32:00).

In conclusion, Roy Batty is a violent character of superior physical and intellectual strength, yet he proves to be capable of feeling compassion, love and absolution.

5. What Defines Human Existence According to Selected Philosophers #

5.1 René Descartes #

René Descartes was a French philosopher, mathematician and scientist. He was born on 31st of March 1596 in Descartes (France) and died on 11th of February 1650 in Stockholm (Sweden). Descartes is known as the originator / father of the early modern rationalism. His rationalistic thinking is sometimes called "Cartesianism". The famous quote "cogito ergo sum" has its origins in his theses, in which he copes with the fundamental questions of existence and self-realization.

The intention of his philosophic work was to find out what is real and what can be doubted. He thus starts his reflections by stating that first of all you cannot trust your senses, as they can easily deceive you. Common examples for this concept are optical illusions of any kind. And because you should never trust anybody who ever lied to you before, Descartes proceeds, you should stop believing your senses.

Next, Descartes discusses whether you can trust your physical experiences and your own body itself by bringing up the example of him sitting in front of his fireplace, writing a letter. With certainty, his senses cannot fool him in regard to such self-evident things as the awareness of his own body. However, he mentions that every other night he dreams of very similar things, for instance himself sitting in front of his fireplace, writing a letter. And in that very moment, he has no way of knowing whether he is dreaming or not. That in return means, that at any given point in time he cannot determine whether he is writing a letter, or in reality lying in his bed, sleeping. He cannot find out what is real and what is not. To defend his thesis against all potential problems, he brings up one final argument: "the great deceiver". After all, even if we should be sure of whether we are sleeping or not, or if we decide to trust our senses, we can still never be certain that there is no almighty imposter that leads us to believe whatever he wants us to believe. The concept of the "great deceiver" is the ultimate factor that reinforces René Descartes idea that everything should be doubted.

The condition of questioning everything results in the world - metaphorically speaking - falling apart. Nothing can be trusted, nothing is indubitably real. Within this chaos, there is only one thing that you can purely rely on: the fact that here and now you doubt everything. Only the sheer fact that you are questioning something is indisputable. Solely the fact that you are thinking is true. He summarized his thoughts in the famous words: "cogito ergo sum", "I doubt, therefore I am", more often translated with "I think, therefore I am".¹⁶

5.1.1 The Philosophy of René Descartes in Blade Runner

Descartes' fundamental concept of and approach to reality and existence can be found throughout Ridley Scott's movie.

First of all, there is the ultimate, obvious and nearly blunt reference to Descartes personified by Pris who directly quotes the philosophers' most famous words: "I think [Sebastian], therefore I am." (1:14:30).

Furthermore, the protagonist's name "Deckard" sounds strikingly similar to "Descartes". However, this homophone carries more than a self-evident reference or mere acoustic similarity, but connects Deckard's character directly, i.e. audibly, to the philosopher and his work.

At last, one of the final movie scenes reflects Descartes' conception of complete doubt and disbelief with Gaff's character yelling at Deckard: "It's too bad she won't live, but then again, who does?" (1:44:20). Thus, at the end of the movie Deckard is challenged with the Cartesian questions on what is life and who does live, does life exist at all and, finally, what is true.

Looking for a selected section of the movie to analyze its philosophic context with regards to the above aspects of Descartes' work the following scene appears most appropriate (30:00-33:30):

Deckard returns from his investigations in Leon's hotel room to his apartment where Rachael already awaits him. Left unaware about the result of her previous own "Void-Kampff" test she has turned uncertain about herself. She is convinced that Deckard considers her as a replicant. In order to prove him false she shows him a family picture of hers together with her mother. Deckard, however, is left unimpressed and confronts Rachael with detailed knowledge of several memories of her childhood, memories she has never told anybody before. When Deckard reveals to her that these memories are in fact programmed implants Rachael freezes and starts to weep. After a moment she drops her family photo and leaves the Blade Runner's apartment in a hurry.

In this crucial movie scene Deckard's figure evolves into a direct personification of the philosopher Descartes. The Blade Runner Deckard echoes the philosopher Descartes stating that nothing can be trusted, everything is disputable. Your senses can deceive you, objects or colors that you think you have seen might totally be a deceptive illusion, your own memories being only untrue, deceiving dreams. Deckard confronts Rachael with this ultimate truth forcing her to realize that nothing, including her memories and even her identity, is certain. Deckard's remarks thus push Rachael into the Cartesian state of total disbelief claimed by Descartes. Consequently, after a short moment of grief Rachael drops her family photo, accepting the new certainty; she surrenders to disbelief and symbolically gives away everything that had previously been of certainty for her. She has now reached the point from which -to Descartes- true human existence emanates from: "I doubt, therefore I am", "cogito ergo sum".

A following movie scene additionally underlines that Racheal has accepted that she has reached the state of total disbelief and that she literally cannot rely any longer on anything: "I can't rely on my [...] feelings" (1:08:50). She has definitely realized that she cannot longer trust her feeling neither her senses.

5.2 Hans Goller #

For a more contemporary philosophical reflection upon the essence of human existence it appears worth to discuss the work of Hans Goller that deals with the concept of qualia.

Hans Goller, born 1942 in Southern Tyrol, studied philosophy, psychology and theology in America and Austria between 1970 and 1982. He became appointed Dean of the Munich School of Philosophy in 1994 for a five-year term and was later appointed Professor for Christian Philosophy at the University of Innsbruck from 2000 to 2008.¹⁷

A quale (plural: qualia) is an individual perceptual quality of a mental state, "a quality or property as perceived or experienced by a person".¹⁸

In his work philosopher Hans Goller¹⁹ criticizes the philosophical concept of functionalism. Functionalists claim that, in order to reach a certain mental state, it is only necessary to experience a sequence of stimulus and reaction. To a functionalist the mental state of pain for example is the impact of an external physical force, i.e. a trauma, which will result in injury, injury will lead to pain, pain will lead to screaming, weeping and crying and, in the end, this sequence will induce an action to eliminate the cause of pain, i.e. it will lead to repair. Goller criticizes, if only such kind of chain reactions would exist it would be imaginable to design and program a robot, that is capable of "learning" pain. A trauma and injury to such a robot will activate its electrical circuits and its robotic applications resulting in the robot to weep and cry and finally into mechanical actions of self-repair. However, such a chain reaction is definitely not human, Goller argues. His definition of what is human and what is the meaning of pain for humans reaches out far beyond a mere sequence of (re-)actions. His concept of qualia is not satisfied with a simple appropriate behavior or with an externally triggered basic reaction, for example that of repair. It demands the total perception of a mental state, i.e. the full-range perception of pain, that might be interrelated e.g. with fear, loneliness, anger or several other individual emotions.

In summary complete perception and awareness, i.e. bearing qualia, defines human existence.

Furthermore, Goller describes that all qualia are entirely different and that these explicit differences between and among all qualia are a further distinct characteristic and element of human existence. For example, "pain" is perceived individually different in terms of pain intensity or pain character (stabbing, burning, radiating), and is correlated with various other and individual emotions. The same is true for feelings of "love" or "joy" or the taste of chocolate; each individual perceives such emotional or sensory input differently and individually. To show qualia, and finally to reveal billionfold different qualia, makes us philosophically a distinct and individual lifeform, makes us finally humans.

5.2.1 The Philosophy of Hans Goller in Blade Runner

The concept of qualia and the philosophical reflections that result from it can be applied to various scenes of the Blade Runner movie: Do replicants have feelings? Are their feelings real? Do these feelings have to be real, to be human feelings? In order to reflect upon qualia-associated aspects of personal experience and perception in the movie, scenes showing replicants in an emotional setting are warranted. Rachel's emotional distress and vulnerability leading her to cry (32:00) or Leon's horrified facial expression as a reaction to eye witnessing Zhora's retirement (56:30) are fine examples for such movie scenes.

The following scene, however, deserves special attention when looking for philosophical aspects related to the qualia concept (1:09:50 – 1:13:00):

After Roy has trespassed into J.F. Sebastian's apartment they are introduced to each other by Pris. The replicants intensively exchange kisses and J.F. Sebastian leaves the scene irritated. Pris asks Roy about the latest news and Roy has to tell her about the death of both Leon and Zhora, showing an extremely sad face. Pris discloses to Roy her worries that they have to die soon as well, however, Roy disagrees with her.

This scene encompasses various emotions of Roy. The intense kissing testifies emotional attraction and his passion, only a few seconds later his facial expression and body posture reflect severe grief and pain. A functionalist will interpret this emotional dynamics and range as evidence that Roy is a human being. A stimulus, in this case the death of two companions, is followed by a reaction, i.e. misery. The final outcome of this chain reaction will satisfy a functionalist, he will gladly declare Roy as human. Philosopher Hans Goller, however, won't be satisfied; to his belief such a mere causal relationship is insufficient to truly experience a mental state. Goller demands a deep perception, i.e. a quale. To Goller's work human existence is defined by individual perception and awareness of emotions that are unique to any single person. Is Roy's attraction to Pris hence affiliated with such a quale? Or does the visual identification of Pris' face (stimulus) only activate neurobiological networks that lead into a programmed reaction from Roy? This question cannot be answered externally, since even the most sophisticated recording of brain activity cannot demonstrate or prove whether the individual currently experiences a quale. The experience is exclusively left to the individual.

While the behavior of the replicants will convince a functionalist of their human existence, this controversy is left unanswered to any follower of the qualia concept.

6. Conclusion #

What defines human existence?

The transfer of information between nerve cells in human beings is understood well nowadays. It resembles a yes/no digital data processing that is found in microchips.

But then what is human?

According to functionalism, mental states are causal sequences. They simply follow an action and reaction scheme. Identical input will lead to identical results. There is no such thing as a soul. Man and machine are therefore considered equal and as equivalent existences.

To my point of view however, this cannot be the final answer to the question of what defines human beings. Without any doubt we are much more than simple chain reactions. Those action and reaction schemes are known for example in reflexes. To watch a baby triggers our nursing reflex. The baby's big head, big eyes and tiny nose are stimuli for our "how cute" reaction and we will protect the baby. Early childhood experiences are able to induce future behaviour comparable to stimulus - reaction schemes. For example, having almost drowned as a child is likely to trigger a lifelong fear of water. These schemes are fundamental part of ourselves and have guaranteed our survival. Yet our emotional variety ranges far beyond that. Why are we stunned looking at the beauty of wide mountains? Why do we enjoy a walk in a green forest, take a deep breath and feel refreshed and part of nature?

Also, according to René Descartes mental states are of no importance. Intellect is substantial, but not emotions. „Cogito, ergo sum": I think/ doubt, therefore I am. The existence of a mind and its ability to doubt and think is what truly defines humans according to Descartes and separates man from animal.

If it is solely the ability of thinking what makes us human, then artificial intelligence must be regarded as human since the discovery of so-called "perceptrons" by Frank Rosenblatt in 1958. Perceptrons are imitations of human nerve cells. They form neuronal networks, which perfectly simulate human thought processes and are able to learn.²⁰

Those neuronal networks as well as the replicants from the movie Blade Runner are definitely to be considered human following Descartes. They collect experiences and modify their behavior, they "think", they doubt, they rebel against what in their perception is unfair in this world. They doubt human laws and rules and create their own. This is what Descartes demanded. Think, doubt everything. By doing so, we become human.

Hence, machines are human, according to Descartes' claims.

The ability to think and doubt is surely a human one to me, but it is not obligatory. Because if you follow this thought, you undoubtedly get to a point where you have to consider the mentally disabled or patients suffering from dementia. Putting mental capabilities at first place robs their humanity. This is unimaginable for me.

So, if it is not exclusively the capability of thinking what makes us human, can the existence of feelings, maybe qualia, make the difference between man and machine?

The taste of chocolate, as we know it, does not exist in the outside world, like gravity or protons do. Instead, "taste" is created biochemically inside our head. Our brains simply convert a certain spectrum of chemical substances into „taste". We can identify those substances but we cannot measure, record or observe the experience of tasting chocolate. So how do we know, that, when two individuals look at chocolate, the perception "yummy" of one brain is the same "yummy" occurring in the other brain? Although we eat the same chocolate, there could be thousands of different tastes connected to them, and no test could ever measure this difference in perception.

These individually perceived qualities are our qualia. In terms of perception, they make us individual and human.

Still we are unable to share our qualia. For example, when describing a colour to someone who has been blind his entire life, you might say, that red is hot and blue is cold, but to someone, who has never seen or experienced colour, this will just sound weird.

We have no way of proving, that my way of tasting chocolate is your way of tasting chocolate, the same applies for feeling pain, love, joy or any other quale. Trying to describe it, we would have to use adjectives and nouns that are correlated to yet another quale that is totally individual again.

All we can understand is that each of us, every single human being, has his individual world of his own qualia, of different qualia, which we cannot share or discuss. Qualia are quite incredible and human!

Thus, in the end the existence of qualia is the decisive factor that makes us human. As soon as artificial intelligence reaches this level, from my point of view, it has to be considered human. Whether these qualia have developed from biological and natural sources like neurons or from technically and artificially connected neuronal systems is not of any importance. To suffer is to suffer, no matter whether artificially or biologically born. Artificial life forms like those in Blade Runner are therefore human; they live, they love, they experience joy. The diversity and the depth of their qualia are equal to human. It does not matter, whether the artificial being really undergoes these qualia or only believes that it experiences them. We could not test or assess it, anyway. The replicants in Blade Runner love, and they love with the same intensity and they are connected to the same uncountable number of correlated and individual emotions as we do. Therefore, they are human. Yet the current artificial life forms we know are not as far developed as those in Blade Runner. But regarding our future and future human potential we should start the discussion about how to deal with humanity that humans will create themselves.

7. References #

1. Baccolini, Raffaella (ed.): Dark horizons. Science fiction and the dystopian imagination. New York, Routledge 2003.
2. Booker, M. Keith: Dystopian literature: a theory and research guide. Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press 1994.
3. Claeys, Gregory: The Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2010.
4. Homer: The Iliad. London, Penguin Classics 1998.
5. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wissen/da-vincis-konstruktionen-wie-leonardos-roboter-laufen-lernen-1407234.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018
6. http://www.habsburger.net/de/objekte/mechanische-ente, last access: March 2nd, 2018
7. http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/html/449.Kismet.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018
8. http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/angela-merkel-besucht-japan-und-trifft-roboter-und-kaiser-akihito-a-1022460.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018
9. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leonardo-Robot3.jpg, last access: March 7th, 2018
10. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/quale, last access: February 26th, 2018
11. https://www.cs.hs-rm.de/~panitz/prog3WS08/perceptron.pdf, last access: March 7th, 2018
12. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/?ref_=nv_sr_1, last access: March 7th, 2018
13. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1, last access: March 7th, 2018
14. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392190/?ref_=nv_sr_1, last access: March 7th, 2018
15. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1, last access: March 7th, 2018
16. https://www.planet-wissen.de/technik/computer_und_roboter/kuenstliche_intelligenz/pwiekuenstlicheintelligenzundbewusstsein100.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018
17. https://www.uibk.ac.at/philtheol/goller/person/index.html.de, last access: March 14th, 2018
18. Rolf, Bernd / Peters, Jörg (eds.): philo Qualifikationsphase. Bamberg, C.C. Buchner Verlag 2015.

Written by Florian van Ophoven

---

Notes #

1. Homer: The Iliad, book 18, lines 417-422. London, Penguin Classics 1998. ↩︎

2. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wissen/da-vincis-konstruktionen-wie-leonardos-roboter-laufen-lernen-1407234.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018 ↩︎

3. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Leonardo-Robot3.jpg, last access: March 7th, 2018 ↩︎

4. http://www.habsburger.net/de/objekte/mechanische-ente, last access: March 2nd, 2018 ↩︎

5. https://www.planet-wissen.de/technik/computer_und_roboter/kuenstliche_intelligenz/pwiekuenstlicheintelligenzundbewusstsein100.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018 ↩︎

6. http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/angela-merkel-besucht-japan-und-trifft-roboter-und-kaiser-akihito-a-1022460.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018 ↩︎

7. http://www.mysearch.org.uk/website1/html/449.Kismet.html, last access: March 2nd, 2018 ↩︎

8. Claeys, Gregory: The Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature, p. 113. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press 2010. ↩︎

9. Booker, M. Keith: Dystopian literature: a theory and research guide, p. 29. Westport, Conn., Greenwood Press 1994. ↩︎

10. Ibid., p. 256 ↩︎

11. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0206634/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1, last access: March 7th, 2018 ↩︎

12. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/?ref_=nv_sr_1, last access: March 7th, 2018 ↩︎

13. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392190/?ref_=nv_sr_1, last access: March 7th, 2018 ↩︎

14. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1535108/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1, last access: March 7th, 2018 ↩︎

15. Baccolini, Raffaella (ed.): Dark horizons. Science fiction and the dystopian imagination, p. 73. New York, Routledge 2003. ↩︎

16. Rolf, Bernd / Peters, Jörg (eds.): philo Qualifikationsphase, pp. 38-41. Bamberg, C.C. Buchner Verlag 2015. ↩︎

17. https://www.uibk.ac.at/philtheol/goller/person/index.html.de, last access: March 14th, 2018 ↩︎

18. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/quale, last access: February 26th, 2018 ↩︎

19. Rolf, Bernd / Peters, Jörg (eds.): philo Qualifikationsphase, pp. 65-66. Bamberg, C.C. Buchner Verlag 2015. ↩︎

20. https://www.cs.hs-rm.de/~panitz/prog3WS08/perceptron.pdf, last access: March 7th, 2018 ↩︎