The Humanistic reality of relationships with Technology
The purpose of technology is to find solutions by making human’s lives simpler, easier and more enjoyable, but, what happens when advances in technology over step the humanistic boundaries of relationships? It is implied that there are many factors which come together in order to experience specific feelings such as love. In “Love 2.0: How Our Supreme emotions Affects Everything We Feel, Think, Do, and Become”, Barbara Fredrickson defines love as strictly biological process, yet in recent generations it is visible that humans have developed intimate bonds with technology. So, how can this properly take place if the thing an individual loves has limited or no biological origin? Technology …show more content…
Thus, a person is not capable of developing an honest bond with it. Barbara Fredrickson claims that love is derived from biological and chemical reactions, including sharing the same wavelength as the partner. You experience the connection but this is not possible if the object the user is trying to connect with is inanimate and based off of artificial intelligence. “ At the robotic moment, more than ever, our willingness to engage with the inanimate does not depend on being deceived but on wanting to fill in the blanks” (Turkel). What Turkel is saying is that humans are subconsciously allowing technology to influence their personal perspectives until they are successfully tricked into pursuing these devices. Ultimately they want attention or to “fill in the blanks” (Turkel). People are more concerned about having contact and being noticed, that it leads them to overlook the purpose of the connection or the reality of the relationship. The connection between two people, through pain or love, can connect, influence, and affect both people. Therefore, the feelings cannot be reciprocated with a machine because it lacks the ability to experience positive or negative emotions. Another aspect to acknowledge is that throughout both excerpts both authors address the technology which is involved in the relationship as “it” (Turkel, Fredrickson). If the partner participating in love is referred to as a thing then the humanistic qualities are immediately being stripped away from the relationship. Therefore, machines cannot be human enough to perform love and they offer only one major aspect that the majority of people crave: attention. Humans often misunderstand the purpose and abilities of technology, they consider the programs artificial intelligence as personal
The purpose of technology is to find solutions by making human’s lives simpler, easier and more enjoyable, but, what happens when advances in technology over step the humanistic boundaries of relationships? It is implied that there are many factors which come together in order to experience specific feelings such as love. In “Love 2.0: How Our Supreme emotions Affects Everything We Feel, Think, Do, and Become”, Barbara Fredrickson defines love as strictly biological process, yet in recent generations it is visible that humans have developed intimate bonds with technology. So, how can this properly take place if the thing an individual loves has limited or no biological origin? Technology …show more content…
Thus, a person is not capable of developing an honest bond with it. Barbara Fredrickson claims that love is derived from biological and chemical reactions, including sharing the same wavelength as the partner. You experience the connection but this is not possible if the object the user is trying to connect with is inanimate and based off of artificial intelligence. “ At the robotic moment, more than ever, our willingness to engage with the inanimate does not depend on being deceived but on wanting to fill in the blanks” (Turkel). What Turkel is saying is that humans are subconsciously allowing technology to influence their personal perspectives until they are successfully tricked into pursuing these devices. Ultimately they want attention or to “fill in the blanks” (Turkel). People are more concerned about having contact and being noticed, that it leads them to overlook the purpose of the connection or the reality of the relationship. The connection between two people, through pain or love, can connect, influence, and affect both people. Therefore, the feelings cannot be reciprocated with a machine because it lacks the ability to experience positive or negative emotions. Another aspect to acknowledge is that throughout both excerpts both authors address the technology which is involved in the relationship as “it” (Turkel, Fredrickson). If the partner participating in love is referred to as a thing then the humanistic qualities are immediately being stripped away from the relationship. Therefore, machines cannot be human enough to perform love and they offer only one major aspect that the majority of people crave: attention. Humans often misunderstand the purpose and abilities of technology, they consider the programs artificial intelligence as personal