If men were reasonable, the net profits from robot machinery would be divided among (1) those who had most to do with devising the new machinery, and (2) all of society. A rule would be adopted (probably it could be less complicated than some existing tax rules) which would take into account various factors such as rewards to the inventors, incentives to continue inventing, adequate assistance to those made unemployed by the robot machines, reduction of prices to benefit consumers, and contributions to basic and applied scientific research.
In fact, under the assumption “if men were reasonable,” it would hardly be necessary to devote a chapter to the problem of social control over robot machines!
OBSTACLES
The discussion above of how robot machines could be controlled supposing that men were reasonable, seems, of course, to be glaringly impractical. Men are not reasonable on most occasions most of the time. If we stopped at this point, again we would be dodging the issue. What are the obstacles to reasonable control?
There are, it seems, two big obstacles and one smaller one to reasonable types of social control over robot machines. The smaller one is ignorance, and the two big obstacles are prejudice and a narrow point of view.
Ignorance
By ignorance we mean lack of knowledge and information. Now mechanical brains are a new and intricate subject. A great many people will, through no fault of their own, naturally remain uninformed about mechanical brains and robot machines for a long time. However, there is a widespread thirst for knowledge these days: witness in magazines, for example, the growth of the article and the decline of the essay. There is also a fairly steady surge of knowledge from the austere scientific fountain of new technology. We can thus see both a demand and a supply for information in such fields as mechanical brains and robot machines. We can expect, therefore, a fairly steady decline in ignorance.
Prejudice
Prejudice is a much more serious obstacle to reasonable control over robot machines. It will be worth our while to examine it at length.
Prejudice is frequent in human affairs. For example, in some countries, but not in all, there is conflict among men, based on their religious differences. Again, in other countries, but not in all, there is wide discrimination among men, based on the color of their skin. Over the whole world today, there is a sharp lack of understanding between conservatives, grading over to reactionaries, on the one hand, and liberals, grading over to radicals, on the other hand. All these differences are based on men’s attitudes, on strongly held sets of beliefs. These attitudes are not affected by “information”; the “information” is not believed. The attitudes are not subject to “judgment”; they come “before judgment”: they are prejudices. Even in the midst of all the science of today, prejudice is widespread. In Germany, from 1933 to 1939, we saw one of the most scientific of countries become one of the most prejudiced.