The Void on the Graph

I was really intrigued by the graphing of artificial intelligence versus human perception of this intelligence that we talked about on Tuesday. We represented the y axis as human reaction, and the x axis as how “human” something is. In the second and third quadrants of our xy plane, we have a valley. Where this valley intersects the y axis, there is a hole in the graph. This point on the graph, was it there, would represent a perfect replica of humanity. Of course, this point cannot exist because the idea of a perfect replica is paradoxical. A replica qua replica would recognize itself as a duplicate, thus making it an imperfect replica. Infinitesimally close to this break in the graph are two beings that elicit the most negative reaction. On the left, the closest possible imitation of human life, which would be disconcerting to say the least. And on the other side there is a corpse.  On the right side, the graph has a steady positive slope, the more “human”, the more positive our reaction. The left side, however, is much more complicated. Less human imitations of life prompt a neutral response and as the machines become more human, the more positive our response. An example of this progression would be R2D2, Wall-e, C3P0. At a certain point, however, the imitations become too lifelike. They are creepy and we react negatively. Our in class example was Tom Hanks in Polar Express, it was just off enough to prompt a negative response. Dolls and mannequins could also fall within quadrant three, because they are inert but their façade is a fairly accurate imitation of life.

My question is what could fill the void in our graph, where the positive slope drops off, but there is still a positive response. In class, I asked if this void could possibly be filled by something like Avatar: extremely realistic humanoids that possess humanity, but physically are clearly of a separate species. We react positively to the Na’vi because they are very human in their hopes and fears; we are able to empathize with them. They don’t, however, challenge our physical identity as humans, because their blue skin, stature, and markings identify them as a distinct species. I think the Na’vi might be able to fill the void in our graph because they are very realistic depictions of humanoids, but still elicit a positive response. I wonder if the Na’vi should even be included on the graph, though, because they are clearly not trying to depict humans.

Any other ideas about what could fill that void? I’ve been racking my brains, but I can’t think of any other examples.