Wait a minute. Why isn't the robot a slave to cause and effect?
If he can, sure. So are humans as we try to understand neurophysiology. That doesn't mean he would be successful.
Why are we assuming this?
~~ Paul
I have not been clear with this simple idea because I fumbled the delivery . . . . May I backtrack for a moment. . . ?
The question is: "Can a robot have a soul ?" But this particular question, though intriguing, can't be answered in
that form, because, not only can't we define 'soul', we cannot even prove that we humans HAVE one.
Still, some/many/most of us, "feel" as if we have a soul. Now, same as with consciousness, and free-will, this "feeling" may in fact be an illusion. But, importantly, no matter whether these things are real, or illusions, the feeling that we have a soul, persists. That cannot be denied. And it persists despite the lack of any empirical evidence. Don't over-think this point. . . We've simply re-worded the question to say : "Can a robot feel like it has a soul ?"
The only way (i can think of) to lend a robot the feeling of a soul, is to make the robot "feel" the same way a human feels about existence. Again, this is lower level logic and no alarms should go off. I mean: We feel like we have a soul (mostly), so program a robot to feel like us and bodda-boom bodda-bing -- the robot feels like it has a soul. And, to be fair, we're going to assume we have a brilliant programmer who can pull this off.
The point I'm introducing to the thread is also nothing to brag about : just how incredibly HARD it would be to create for our robot, these various illusions/feelings. You suggested that one way to make the robot 'feel' as if he had free-will, was to restrict access to the initial steps in the decision making process, so that the robot only "saw" the end result, and so the robot would assume that it was his own volition that made the decision.
* And I thought you'd made a good suggestion. Then I guess I just assumed that, in order to maintain the illusions we'd programmed into it, the robot would need to perfectly "blend" in with his surroundings; to share the same mental composition as his comrades, and to be made of the same material as his surroundings (Just like we humans are) The point here, again not too brite, is that if the robot were to notice a glaring distinction between himself and EVERYTHING else, the game would instantly be Up - and he would Know that he'd been designed. Same as if you went to get an X-ray, and it showed a bunch of gears and levers working inside you.
The final point is the simplest of all : one of the most fundamental aspects of being human, is NOT KNOWING WHERE WE CAME FROM.
** It is the mystery of all mysteries, and every single individual craves an answer, one that will give meaning to his life. I KNOW we both accept this universal human curiosity - it's why we're on this forum. And essentially, the fact that we DON'T have a ready-made and provable answer, allows us the freedom to create our own faith (science) or invest ourselves in traditional wisdom (religion). Through freedom, we find our faith, and create our own meaning. What I'm saying, in a ham-handed way I admit, is that
searching for a soul,
gives us a soul - (or, the illusion of a soul) so the robot that we program, MUST suffer, the same uncertainties that we do.
*(Here, I will avoid introducing the possible infinite regress implied by one deterministic (biological) robot, programming another robot.)
**with 100 percent consensus, like God on the White House lawn