The evolution of Dr. Calvin

At the end of the final chapter, Dr. Calvin’s last remarks were about the evolution of robots: “I saw it from the beginning, when the poor robots couldn’t speak, to the end, when they stand between mankind and destruction.” (272) As the short stories unravled, we began to realize how generations after generations of robots were able to always be a step ahead of human kinds in figuring out maneuvering tactics within the boundaries of the three Laws of Robotics, in so doing inadvertently taking agency away from their own masters. What is more remarkable, however, is the hint of human’s willingness to adapt to such changes of equilibrium, and their optimism rather than resigned acceptance in the capable hands of the Machines (I’m referring to both the latest generation of robots in the final chapters and robots in general). The one robopsycho analyst Dr. Calvin, for instance, was the one person that showed such remarkable change in attitude. From the end of chapter 5 which told the story of Herbie the robot that could lie, we can see that Dr. Calvin’s decision to break down this robot mentally stemmed from her anger when she found out that she was tricked into believing that Ashe was in love with her. In a sense, we can say that this turn of events showed that although humans had already got to the point where they could accept their reliance upon robots for their survival in a physical sense i.e energy resources and labor, they were uncomfortable at the idea that their mental well-beings were at the mercy of their own creations. From the end of chapter 9, however, as Dr. Calvin retold her last significant experience with robots, specifically the ones called the Machines, her eloquent, articulated and direct answer to Byerley gave off the impression that she had purely moved on from the events in chapter 5 and began to consider the positive outcomes of the robot’s capability to lie. Similar to Herbie, the Machines can lie, or at least willingly hide any kind of explanation for its action that could “make us unhappy and hurt our pride.” (271) Even more remarkably,  as Byerley, who is very likely to be a robot himself, doubted the Machines, Dr. Calvin stood by her answer, showing that humans have the capability to sympathize with robots much better than robots themselves, who apparently can only listen to those among themselves who had the greater command at logic. We can say that years of experience as a robot-psycho analyst have been of great advantage to Dr. Calvin and showed her the answer, but in a way, it can also mean that as humans and robots become more and more intertwined, mutual understanding and empathy (and the counterpart of “empathy” in robots, whatever that may be called) can only be the sole outcomes that are inevitable.