Questions
1.You have control over when to finish accepting technology. What would be your decision? You can either end it or keep it going on forever. Include in your answer observations on positive and negative effects of technology as mentioned in chapter 3 or give examples of your own.
2. ' Vinge has given some thought to that. "We will see automation replacing higher and higher level jobs......the work that is truly productive is the domain of a steadily smaller and more elite fraction of humanity".'p76
How does this affect the employment scenario in the near future? what effects will we see in the social structure? As an ICU student, how would you future-proof your usefulness, and make sure that you are not replaced by a machine?(e.g job choice, skills etc.)
3. "Out here in Silicon Valley,I have spoken to people who say they consider regular regular human relationships superfluous and outdated, that they get everything they need from the computer. They say that and mean it". p63
How much do you agree with this observation? Do you think that computers can provide the answer to everything from relationships to nature?
Group Leaders:
Aoki Sayaka
Makishima Sayako
Abe Shantonu
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete3.) I don't agree with this statement, especially that, "regular human relationships [are] superfluous and outdated." Sure, it may be easier to talk to someone through a computer since you won't have to look him or her in the eye. Plus, I guess if you join some kind of online community, you'll have no trouble looking for someone to talk to since everybody is there for that reason. However, I think this really numbs our five senses and emotions. While looking at a computer will mainly use sight, talking to somebody in real life is interesting because you can hear their voice, and I guess smell their scent? lol? not to sound weird, or give them a hug, and be in the same context as they are at that moment - like talking at school, standing outside in the cold - and you get to relate to each other about those kinds of things. I think that computers, no matter how advanced they may become, will never beat those real-life experiences that bring people closer together.
ReplyDeleteAs far as providing answers go, I think that computers provide very limited answers. The Internet is deceptive in the sense that it gives the user the feeling that he or she is surfing through all that there is to know on the subject, when large parts may actually be missing. Like what happened in China, I think it was? When somebody googled a certain place or name of an incident, all that would show up was touristy info and nothing pertaining to its problematic history. In addition to providing limited answers, they provide them way too easily. They take away the hassle of trying to find the meaning of a word or trying to find someone (like in a crowd, as opposed to just finding them online), making it happen in a snap. Therefore, even if it is convenient, it takes away a lot of value and appreciation from the end result of finally discovering what you're looking for.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2.I don't think the replacement will take place while I'm alive. So my view might sound too optimistic. But if most of our jobs were replaced by automation, there would surely be few people who have jobs. And thereby most people would be able to live without earning a living. Technically, they can't earn. Then how would they get money? Maybe they would get financial assistance from government or they would own their own machines and receive the wage of them. Either way, I don't see any necessity for proofing my usefulness because I don't have to work. Why would I?
ReplyDeleteFrankly, even now, when there are jobs to do and I can find a job way more easily, I don't have any intention to work. I just want to guard my house for 24 hours a day, everyday. You may be laughing, but I'm serious. Suppose you hit a lottery and got 1 billion yen. What would stop you from just hanging out with friends, buying a house in Hawaii or whatever? The main reason we work is to earn money, as showed in this survey (http://www.pref.akita.lg.jp/www/contents/1193380751968/files/HATARAKURIYUU.pdf).
Perhaps the reason why you are here in ICU is also to get a good job or good money. You can refute me by saying that work is more than just money. It is certainly true and sounds right, but if you look at ants, you can imagine I'm not an exception. ( Only 80% of ants work, while the rest of them just goof around. Actually this behavior has significant meaning related to the concept of emergence{ 創発 in Japanese}, but let's ignore it here.) So I wouldn't proof my usefulness. Rather, I would be willing to give my job over to machines.
Thank you for your comment, Kaya. I agree that its hard to imagine how anyone would want to use computers as a replacement for relationships with current perceptions. However, think about it from the standpoint of the people here. They live 24x7 in front of screens, and thus its CONVENIENT for them. What if these people are the Innovators and Early Adopters. I found a book called The Shallows (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Shallows-Internet-Changing-Think-Remember/dp/1848872259/) which records the effects that increased connectivity to the Net is leading to more superficial thinking.
ReplyDeleteAbout the five senses, i don't think that's a limiting factor as technology advances. We could create 'hallucinations' where we would be induced into thinking that our senses are at work.
The scenario you describe in the later part sounds chillingly like a passage from '1984'.Maybe reliability of information does become an issue for the future.
Awaiting further comments.
3. This idea of getting anything from the computer, even relationships, was pretty interesting to me. Today, we have instant messaging which allows us to communicate with each other anytime and anywhere. I first thought that I would never want that kind of relationship with specific people. Yes, because of the elements like Kaya wrote, such as smell, and others like warmth. Than, I read Shantonu's reply and thought about hallucinations. It was very interesting. It makes one possible to smell, touch, and interact just like today through the Internet or something different. I think this opens people to the virtual world. Virtual worlds will allow one to go to the movies together in that world without any emotions or such human aspects left behind. One just has to sit in front of the computer. Some of it has already happened, and if one wants to play a board game or card game it is available via Internet. What a wonderful technology to use; it reduces wasting time, such as time spent on transportation, and increases the efficiency of using it.
ReplyDeleteSome people may think what about the health problems regarding this, but obviously if technology reaches this point, biotechnology will solve any health problems. Therefore, there will be no health issues.
Considering all of these points above, yes, I think that computers can provide anything once a perfect virtual world is built. However, I think the real point of this question is if I would like to use it when it is available. The answer is no. At the moment, I can tell the difference of virtual worlds and reality. Virtual worlds are fake; in other words, I am able to understand that computers are messing with senses, and the world itself is nihilistic(?). Even if it provides the same elements of reality, the fact that virtual worlds are fake will bother me, and think that I am not communicating with others. I will feel empty once I come back to reality. Hence, it depends on the person and situation that will decide me to use the technology, and the balance is also important to not corrupt myself.
2. Thank you for your comment, Tomoaki. I never thought about people who didn't need to work. You got me there, but maybe you could answer the first part, where i ask about the social effects.
ReplyDeleteYour figure of 20% of something doing meaningful work seems right on the mark.This is true for everything that we do. But, As this 20% starts to refer to a whole that gets smaller, it could have severe repercussions on society. i would like to hear your opinion on this.
Thank you for your comment, Yuuji.
ReplyDeleteHow perfect is a 'perfect virtual world'? Maybe it would come to a point where it is indistinguishable from reality. I really hate to ask this question, but is what we perceive the world to be an accurate portrayal of the world we live in?
I presume from your reply that you think that technology is no panacea, that something made by humans on this scale cannot be perfect. Please clarify if my assumption is wrong.
Hey Shantonu,
ReplyDeleteI doubt it is accurate. We perceive the world in terms of human beings. Well, comparing the world and virtual world there probably would be no difference. But, I would not choose to sit in front of the computer and live in the virtual world even if there is no difference between the two.
This had made me think why. The fact that the computer is making the virtual world would just simply bother me. I think when there are two perfect worlds, there would only be one perfect world. In other words, one real world. I would think that the virtual world is fake because it will be developed due to technology. I am really having trouble how to explain this... The fact that the computer is creating a world and it came out after the real world was made, it is only a dead copy of the real world. I think it is similar to the difference of a legal copy of a DVD and a pirate version of a DVD. Both are perfect aren't they? Obviously if the virtual world becomes better than the real world, the virtual world will gain its acceptance.
Actually, I think that your assumption to my reply is totally the opposite. Computers can create perfection, and I just wanted to point out that it needs to surpass the real world to gain acceptance. I mean what good is there when it is just a copy? This is really hard to explain, maybe I'll just talk about it on Friday.
It'll be great if you could spell my name right!
I'm so sorry for my late comment.
ReplyDelete3. I strongly disagree with the idea that computers can provide the answer to everything from relationships to nature. Today many SNS, for example, facebook or mixi is popular among young people. It enables us to contact with our friends easily, but it cannot take place of regular human relationships. When we talk to someone, our brain works so hard to read the situation. We perceive the tone of voice, body language, details of facial expression, aura and so on. We need so many evidence like those to know what someone else really think and feel. It is of course the complicated process with a sense of sight, hearing or something. Such processes, skills and sense is no longer required for the relationship online. We cannot read the situation perfectly because who we talk to is not in front of us and only we can do is making decision with limited information. When losing such an ability, our ability of perception will be limited. Plus, SNS or such services(including Skype) tend to keep users in front of the computer all the time and makes us insecure when away from the computer. The current survey by a newspaper company(I forgot its name...) shows that many young people who use SNS feel uneasy when thay cannot get reply online for just one day from their friends. What's more, it also makes them feel bad when they cannot check their account for only one day. When they start to chat with frineds online, they also feel bad to quit chats and continue it even though thay want to quit. It seems that SNS controls human's time, daily life or mind. We should not let computers invade our human's activity too much. When you go too deeply, you cannot get out of it against your mind.
For those reasons human should not depend on online human relationships. They have to cherish intetacting human relationships.
3. One of my three articles about future technology was about the future technologies presented in a pavilion in China. In the article it says that in the near future, we will be able to "touch" people far away, such as virtually hugging, kissing and shaking hands with them by logging on to a system that connects people's senses. If you want to become a superstar in your own bedroom, just sing and dance, and a virtual audience will give you a big hand. You can even get married online as if your bride is sitting by your side. Moreover, diagnosis machines enable patients have their health checked at home and send digital indicators of a person's health to doctors to analyze. Since these systems are much more developed than the existing technology such as SNS, I felt that the future technologies are beyond my imagination and therefore maybe it will be able for computers to provide answers to everything from relationships to nature in the future. (not now though, as Kaya, Yuji and Kaori mentioned)
ReplyDeleteWell I'm sorry for my weak statement but the article is quite interesting, (it's a bit short though) so why don't you read it?
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010expo/2010-08/13/content_11148183.htm
Thank you Kaori for your comment. I know you've been busy working on many things so no need of feeling sorry ok.
ReplyDeleteSince no one has responded to my question I'm going to reply to your comment. Sorry Shantonu!!
I agree with your idea of people feeling uneasy without online connection with their friends. I myself have known some who feel strong urge for going home and get their phone that they left behind no matter they are on the way to school or are already there. I at the first stage found it hilarious that they are so stuck with their phone and need to stay with it all the time. But then it was to be talked about and discussed on TV by psychologist or even politicians from Ministry of Education. Their concerns take various positions. Some say those whose main device to remain connected to their friends is phone are tend to be dependent and not to know how to communicate and interact with people face-to-face. From neuroscience point of view, a claim alarms that human brains do not work in online communication as active as ordinary direct communication. it also is a fact that there are people who accept it and have no problem with it. They might go like this: 'the society moves on with technology. It's been always like that and always will. People get scared of what they have not yet experienced'. It's something not quite understandable for me because I'm not big friends with my phone, fortunately or unfortunately.
You also mention about the facial expression and body languages as such portions that cannot be conveyed through online communication. This I contradict. The computer screen for sure cannot represent the atmosphere around the speakers like you say but it can reflect facial expressions, and tones of the voice, gestures and whatever you hear and see when communicating face-to-face. I personally feel, though, uncomfortable with chatting online like on Skype or phone. It feels like talking to my friends through narrow pipeline ignoring all that facts that might be partly composing and affecting the conversation. So frustrating.
Again, thank you for your contribution to the discussion and see you on Monday.
Thank you Fumika for providing us with interesting article!
ReplyDeleteWow this is way to imaginative to accept as something that might come true one day!!! So what I said above 'talking to my friens through narrow pipeline' is rather unrealistic for those people, it seems! These technologies mentioned in the article can transmit more things experienced in normal direct interaction and leave out less than does the current online communication device we have. I do not know if I would like it though. Actually, it is quite hard to clearly state my position of this issue like whether those new technologies can be good or can take place of the ordinary interaction because none of these has come in practice. Not yet.
Well, we talked a lot about this kind in the last class I guess...lol
Thank you for your post!
I think jobs that doesn't need any special skill; like waitress(or..should I say waitperson?), cashiers at convenience stores and supermarkets, and so on, will no longer be in need in the near future. New technologies can take over them. And when technologies develop even more, most of the jobs in need of expert knowlege including doctors and college teachers might also be able to be replaced by robots. Then, many people would lose their job and only people with jobs that human can do-like artists, writers, scientists, actors, etc will be able to proceed their work. A thing that human can and robots cannot do is to create. People with intelligence to create will be the only ones not in danger of replacement by technology.
ReplyDeleteIts hard to imagine what will happen to the people without their jobs, but I think people will try to have contact with each other more than they do in present because otherwise there will be less chance of meeting someone in daily life. Plus I think people will have so much spare time.
The problem is how will people earn money when all of these jobs are taken over. Maybe the government might deliberately make jobs for people and pay money for the work they do. Then there might be a new hierarchy of people working in jobs that only human can do, and people who are working at jobs given from the government. But I'm sure you know, all of these things are just my imagination. Many other scenarios are possible.
If I knew that many of the jobs in the future is going to be taken over, I would want to get a job that only human can do. Otherwise it would be hard to show what I am worth to the society.
Sorry for the very late post!
ReplyDeleteEveryone is commenting on #3, so I'll challenge answering #2...
2. Automation in Venge’s idea refers to machines that have greater- than- human- intelligence or superhuman intelligence. One of the examples is extended memory, which is mentioned in page 74. Humans are smart but we have limits on our ability, like memory, calculation, and accuracy. Also, we cannot work for a long time because our physical endurance is limited too. That is why Vinge says that automation that does not have such limitations will replace higher level jobs.
This will change the employment scenario because the employers would want different kind of workers. Today, employers look at the intelligence of people when hiring new workers. However, in the future where machines that have superhuman intelligence work for higher level jobs, employers do not feel the necessity of intelligent people; they are satisfied with the machines. However, what cannot be replaced by the machines is the ability to think. In page 76, it says that “customer service provided by the machines becomes much nicer”, but this is all programmed, considering what would be the best way to make customers feel satisfied. Thinking ability, I think, cannot be programmed or even if it could, it cannot surpass the humans’. Therefore, the employers look at human’s ability of thinking when hiring workers, not the intelligence that machines can also have.
This brings a change in social structure because the universities that educate people for making them be able to be employed would have to change the way of education; students have to learn how to think critically, to be beyond the machines. So the principle of education will be different because now, the critical thinking is still not emphasized in education. Taking these points into account, as an ICU student, I will be a useful person because I will acquire high ability of thinking critically in ICU. Thanks to ICU that strongly emphasizes critical thinking, we, the ICU students, will not be replaced by the machines in the future!:)
3.I can understand why anyone would want to say that regular human relationships today are getting outdated. If you go way back, Japanese people would write waka for their love ones on a sheet of paper and put some scent to it by burning incense close to it. People would have delivered them on foot and they responded to them by sending the same kinds of letters. The beauty of the paper, the smell, and of course the song was supposed to be the only one way to describe people's feelings for one another.
ReplyDeleteWell, we don't do that anymore. Why? Because it's inconvenient? That would be the biggest reason. But mostly, it's just because of the fact that we have other options now and those other options seem better to us in some way. No specific reason.
I mean, I wouldn't feel bad if I received a letter like that, but I sure would feel awkward.. I won't be able to understand its beauty maybe.
I did give a extreme example, but things do change, and relationships are not an exception. They take different forms according to the shift in value. And this shift will definitely occur.
If you could feel the warmth and affection of a person online, many people will take that opportunity. If I were to say more, so many people will feel saved by it. People get lonely. They want company anyway possible. And they do it online simply because it was a option. What is so wrong about that?
It's often said that people are builting more and more superficial relationships via the internet and that it's a huge problem and that it's causing more crime. I think people believe in this statement because they somehow think they should believe it. But if you come to think of it, if people didn't have the internet and didn't have a virtual world where they could at least "get in touch with people" through computer screens, wouldn't there be more people suffocating from solitude? Maybe, just maybe, wouldn't there be more suicides or homicides? Why isn't that a possibility?
I see what Yuji means. It's the kind of hollow feeling you get after. But I think it still helps. And if people feel it helps, the value/principles will shift in a way that it will accept these new forms of relationship.
I’m so sorry for my late post!
ReplyDelete2. I think the alternation from human laborers to high-intelligence machines has serious effect on the employment scenario in the future, and people will required to have something that cannot simply replaced by those machines to get jobs.
There is no doubt that considering the level of intelligence, most of the people in the world will be lower than future-machines. (or maybe like Matrix, one day we can instill intelligence from PC! Then rich people will certainly be VERY smart…but let’s just ignore that lol) More and more human workers are actually being replaced in the modern society already, for examples waiters to touch-panel order machines(?) and cashers to self-check-out counters. I mean, all the machines in the societies are basically there for replacing human works. In order not to be taken over by the machines, we humans have to put more effort in enhancing something that only humans have, such as emotions, ability to think profoundly, imagination and so on. Future citizens might have to live in the world where they have to adjust for machines. This is approaching “a Singularity- a point where our everyday world stops making sense”(p72).
The most certain way of getting job is to learn mechanical engineering and be the one who invent future machines, but as a ICU student, like Yumi said, I want to emphasis the ability to think like ”human”.
1. I have to admit, the day I stop accepting technology will never come. Maybe for right now, I could say that changing human nature is ethically wrong and that I would not let technology change human beings into another creature. However, if the world admits new technologies, I can not promise that I would go against everyone and deny those technologies.
ReplyDeleteEspecially with the fact that technology develops in a curve, it will be hard to stop yourself. You would be going up the curve so fast that by the time you realize how much technology has effected you, it will be to late to remove them from your lives. Obviously, that is the negative element of the technology curve. The positive effect could simply be the speed of technological innovations. It makes our lives more convenient. However, again, many seems to be confused with such speed. So it is difficult to say that this is the positive side of The Curve when it is concerned all together.
Although you said that we have control of when to stop accepting technology, I get the impression that we don’t. For example, one can not be a dedicate student if they have no computer or internet, for most of the courses require reports and projects done online. It has become a world that people are made to live with technology. If we choose not to, it basically means that you are out of the society. In addition, technology is developing so fast that we don’t know what is going to be “a matter of course”. It feels like we don’t have a chose to go along with the curve.
I'm so sorry for making a so late comment that the group leaders might not check anymore, but anyways, I' d like to answer to the question #1.
ReplyDelete1. Honestly saying, I wouldn't make the decision to finish accepting technology. Technologies have been used to create things to answer our needs and make our daily life more convenient. Let's take our demand communicating with others for example. The system of mail service and telephones started to get in touch with someone in the distance and later, humans not being satisfied with it invented e-mails, making great use of the new technology 'Internet'. In addition, people's wish to communicate with someone not only by messages or speaking, but by both plus seeing the person probably led to the diffusion of 'Skype.'
Those wishes didn't just come true. Companies are always seeking for people's needs to make new product to enrich people's life, while it also means gaining profit in shortest way for the companies. Scientists provide technologies to the companies where they get their salaries paid from. So what I want to say is that as long as people try to live in more and more convenient way and companies try to live up to those expectations, new technologies would be sought and there will be no chance to refuse it.
Humans are apt to pursue what lies ahead after achieving one goal or a task.
The positive effect by technologies is that daily life becomes most of the time more convenient. On the other hand, as the number of made-of-new-technology things increase around us, we can't deny that we feel as if we are watched or our privacy invaded. Moreover, if there are too many opprtunities for machines to take over humans' position such as in work or stuff Kana has mentioned above, it might be hard for us to look for jobs, or to put it in an extreme way, we might lose our meaning of our existence as humans.
holy crap im sooo sorry
ReplyDeletei totally forgot about this blog for this week
i just had a american football game yesterday and won!!yay lol
kanke-naikedo
#3/ like yuji said, since the start of telephones it enabled us to communicate without seeing each other. technology helps us to communicate easier with people like MSN and Skype. through twitter, it connects so many people so easily without knowing who they are or what they do. I do not say that is a bad thing, it is rather good to connect people. But when thinking about demerits of this, there are crimes done through internet connections. When one can get anything from the computer there will be many risks too. The point Kaya made is one of the most important factor of this topic probably. The convenience of computers will definitely be a help fro those who have problem communicating with others. But can you see what kind of person who he is without meeting him? Some may say people will show the real part of them through internet, maybe so. Thus, again it is dependent on what each wants. If one just want to be connected someone and do not have to meet face to face then relationship only through internet is alright. If one want want to see how they are face to face then one should meet.
im not sure if im making myself clear but hope some of you can understand!!!
to make it simple i just want to say that relationship is not only about just having connection but to have a face to face relationship to FEEL each other face to face.
and again im soooooo sorry for the late post
1.If I have control over accepting the spread of technology, I would not choose to cease it no matter what. There might be many negative effects of too much use of technology at various kinds of fields, but here I want to focus on the environment problem.
ReplyDeleteSome might argue that too much use of technology such as cars and factory result in emissions of carbon dioxide and pollute the air.
And the more technology develop, the more space would be needed to create new products, so people cut trees, destroy forests to make space for new factories.
As a result of polluted air and cutting too much trees, people realize that it's a serious problem that needs to be solved. So, scientists and researchers would seek ways that can solve this problem and created hybrid car.
As you can see from this example above, it can be understood that technology has its negative side which badly influence the environment, but simultaneously it has its positive side that technology would develop to solve that negative sides. Therefore, technology holds its negative side and positive side in it self, at the same time.
Therefore, I would not choose to stop accepting the use of technology no matter how it badly influence environment or people because people who make new technology tend to create new technology that can solve those problems.
Thank you all for your reactions to question 3.
ReplyDeleteI would like to clarify a doubt.When you guys stress the word FEEL, as in things which are intangible and abstract, do you accept the presence of a power more powerful than human beings? or do you think that gods do not exist, and that humans have the power to control everything. I think that what we crave for as humans is unpredictability, something that we might not get from machines. Being unpredictable is being human,right?
I am sorry for the very late comment! ;(
ReplyDelete3/I disagree with the idea and I don't think computers can ever provide answer to everything.
Sure we have an access to whole lots of information online, but we have to be aware that they are all biased. It is a bit dangerous to believe that everything on the computer is the "answer". And also, It is risky to have relationships online because what happens when a computer crashed?
And it is already mentioned, but I too think that it is necessary to "feel" when communicating and this "feeling" we can't get it through the technology.
This post is from Asami Hashimoto:
ReplyDelete3. I totally disagree that technology can provide the answers from the ralationships to nature.
In my view, for human relationship, people need direct contacts. In my personal experimences, it sometimes makes me feel very uncomfortable to communicate with mobile phones to send texts, because we cannot really know what the other person is really thinking. He or she can lie or hide their true feelings very easily, so I sometimes struggle to get what he or she is meaning, especially when they are not close to me.
Recently, I found the article said like this.
"It has been said that young generations do not want to go abroad recently. They can now use Internet and see what is occuring on the other side of the earth, and it satisfies them because it makes them feel like they know the world. However, it is only virtual experience. It can never take place of the real experimences."
True experimences, such as interactions with others or new cultures, are inevitably needed because they advance our growth or self-development. Also, informations we get from Internet is not perfectly correct as long as people are involved because nformation depends on how we can interpret those meanings.
For these reasons, I do not think science can take place of true dialog or interactions among people.
oh, by the way my answer was a response for No.2:)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI totally forgot to post comments on this blog grrr I'm going to catch up from now on, I am really sorry.
ReplyDelete3, I do not agree with either "regular human relationships are superfluous and outdated" or "computers can provide the answer to everything from relationships to nature". However, it is obvious that the technologies are now part of our daily life, at least in developed countries, as the author explained on p62.
It depends on the individuals. In terms of relationship, I rely heavily on the internet. Even though I don't dare to be friends with someone I don't know on the social networking websites, I actually do build relationships through the internet. I do not see any problems because I understand that they are my friends that are on the other side of the computer and I don't cross the line.
Thus computers, or the internet can provide us with a lot about relationship in that sense in my opinion.
I’m so sorry.
ReplyDelete2. I think that there the replacement of high leveled jobs would affect the employment scenario in the future seriously. Now the jobs which are low level, for example, the waiters and the cashiers as Miki said are already replaced by machines. Yumi said that the machine would not have the thinking ability as the humans. But I think that the machines would be developed to think on their own in the end (I don't know when but i think they will). So, maybe all the work there is would be taken by the machines. However I think that it will change little by little so the kind of jobs that the human thinks which needs responsibility would remain to be humans' job pretty long. At least, I would like the teachers, doctors, and politicians being human since its not only the intelligence which counts to be a good one. They need moral and responsibility. About the effects in the social structure, there should be many people without jobs. If the minority of people doesn't have jobs then they can't earn money so, it may be the governments job to do something for the people. For the question about how I would proof my usefulness, I would empathize that I have morality which the people should want to have.
Thank you for your comment, Naoko.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that morality is something that only humans can have? Do you think that all the people in the future will be teachers, religious leaders or politicians?