RoboSpouse
Dr Nancy's Sweetie
interesting whether you've seen it or not. (The RoboCop installments aren't
bad for action movies, but they aren't Othello, either.)
A quick summary: in the first movie, Alex Murphy is a police officer killed in
the line of duty. He is revived and given a full body prosthesis; that is,
some of his vital organs and his brain are transplanted into a robot body. As
part of the process, the doctors who work on him erase his personal memories;
they keep only his police training and general knowledge, removing all the
parts of him which make him uniquely Alex Murphy. However, this blanking is
not perfect, and as the movie progresses, his memories return to him. By the
end of the film he is calling himself `Murphy' instead of `RoboCop'.
In the second movie, he has been told by his designers that he is no longer
a person -- he is a machine. He is also told to inform his wife (widow?)
that he is only a machine, even though he `is' Alex Murphy. (She has had a
hard time coping with his death, especially when a robot named `Murphy' keeps
showing up in the newspapers.)
A problem comes up when making more RoboCops, and a psychologist who is hired
to help make sense of things profiles Alex Murphy. He survived the process of
being revived, she says, because he has a strong sense of duty. He has
continued on despite the rather radical changes because he was emotionally
stable and not "macho". Part of his psychological makeup is that he was (is?)
Roman Catholic.
Mainstream movies often avoid discussions of religion, because they do not
wish to drive away potential customers, but this comment fascinated me.
Would Alex Murphy, as a Roman Catholic, still be married to Mrs Murphy? Is
she his wife or widow? Part of Murphy's brain is computer-controlled; he can
only do things consistent with his software (to a point). Do these
limitations affect his culpability for his actions?
He was dead for several hours before they plugged in his brain; is it possible
that his soul went on its way and his mind and (partial) body are all that is
in the cybernetic body? If so, is it really Murphy?
What other theological aspects of cybernetic revivals would come up? (This
is not limited to Roman Catholics; everybody can toss in their two cents.)
It may be possible to revive people in mechanical bodies in 100 years or so;
would cyborgs be welcomed in churches?
kil...@gboro.glassboro.edu Darren F. Provine ...njin!gboro!kilroy
"They'll fix it. They fix everything." -- Alex Murphy
Ling Chang
[Robocop explanations deleted]
>Would Alex Murphy, as a Roman Catholic, still be married to Mrs Murphy? Is
>she his wife or widow? Part of Murphy's brain is computer-controlled; he can
>only do things consistent with his software (to a point). Do these
>limitations affect his culpability for his actions?
This gets into the question "What defines a human-being?". Anyway, I do not
think that his brains is directly computer-controlled. However, all the
robotic parts are linked to the computer. Murphy can control his actions using
his brain, through the computer IF it does not contradict with the rules
programmed in the computer. In other words, even though he may not want to do
something that's stated in the software, the computer still executes the
program since it controls all the moving parts and senses. All that's left of
Murphy is probably his brain (which is still active).
>He was dead for several hours before they plugged in his brain; is it possible
>that his soul went on its way and his mind and (partial) body are all that is
>in the cybernetic body? If so, is it really Murphy?
He may be dead in the sense that his heart stopped. But they must have kept
the brain active by providing blood..(oh..oh..got into biology which I'm not
familiar with). Anyway, this raises an interesting question, is the soul
dependant or independant of the body, brain, heart?
Jesus replied:"` Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your
soul and with all your mind.' Matt 22:37
Seems to me that Murphy can't fulfilled the above commandment since he lacks a
heart and maybe a soul.
>What other theological aspects of cybernetic revivals would come up? (This
>is not limited to Roman Catholics; everybody can toss in their two cents.)
>It may be possible to revive people in mechanical bodies in 100 years or so;
>would cyborgs be welcomed in churches?
>kil...@gboro.glassboro.edu Darren F. Provine ...njin!gboro!kilroy
>"They'll fix it. They fix everything." -- Alex Murphy
In His Love,
Ling Siow Chang.
lch...@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
:-D
Joseph H Buehler
Would Alex Murphy, as a Roman Catholic, still be married to Mrs
Murphy? Is she his wife or widow? Part of Murphy's brain is
computer-controlled; he can only do things consistent with his software (to
a point). Do these limitations affect his culpability for his actions?
He was dead for several hours before they plugged in his brain; is it
possible that his soul went on its way and his mind and (partial) body are
all that is in the cybernetic body? If so, is it really Murphy?
Once the soul and body separate, you have death. If there is no
separation, there is no death. If Murphy came back to life, you may be
assured that he never died. If he really and truly died, there's
nothing anyone but God can do to bring him back, and that's not likely
to happen until the Last Judgement.
My guess would be that he's still married, since he never died.
Horribly mutilated, in some sense, but still married.
As far as free will goes, electrochemical manipulations of the human
brain can certainly lessen or even remove all culpability. Some forms
of insanity or severe retardation result from brain damage, don't they?
My gut feeling is that taking a human being apart and putting his
nervous system into a machine would be highly immoral.