The first law states that no robot may harm a human, or let them come to harm by inaction. By the final chapter, the robots have taken this a step further and have applied this to humanity as a whole. Now, the robots will actually harm humans if their actions will serve to prevent harm from humanity as a whole. We learn, at the end of the book, that the robots have taken over humanity in this respect. They control everything the very path and future of humanity. While they actually benefit humanity, as the first law set out to do, they have completely taken over, which the first law explicitly tried to prevent.
Is this good or bad? Does I, Robot represent a Utopia or Dystopia?
This is a difficult question to answer. The book presents a future where humanity cannot fail. Large-scale issues will be taken care of, and humans will live out the best future possible as a species. There is no need to worry about World Wars, Global Warming, or Nuclear Apocolypse. This seems like a utopic situation. By definition, this is the best future possible. It can be likened to a god watching over humanity.
However, there is something off-putting about the situation. What is more important: happiness or free will? Humanity has lost its free will; its ability to determine its own actions. This seems like a dystopic situation: humans have been stripped of their humanity.
No comments:
Post a Comment