When I first began reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, I admittedly had a hard time concentrating. Due to time restraints, I always get to my seminar class about thirty minutes early, and I decided that that would be a good time to start reading. But that day there were some students practicing calculus in the room, and I had a hard time concentrating over their questions and confusions. I began to get frustrated because I felt that there was something—although I wasn’t sure what it was yet—that was going to be very valuable in this book, and I couldn’t isolate my mind enough to think about it. The pseudo-post-apocalyptic world I was reading about in Dick’s book was interesting, and I began to glean some meaning from it, but not enough. When I got back to my room later that night, I tried to read the book more seriously, and I began to have more in depth thoughts.
I felt that this book deserved my complete attention.
The book has only begun, and the section we were asked to read thus far has really only served as an introduction to the world of 2021. Humans have been forced to emigrate to other planets after a devastating nuclear world war. Those who remain on Earth do so at enormous risk, braving fallout forecasts and general loneliness. Emigrants to other planets were given androids upon their arrival, robots that are impossibly difficult to distinguish from humans. Because the government is afraid of what they may be capable of on Earth, Rick Deckard, one of the main characters, is a bounty hunter whose job is to kill or at least to destroy—to “retire”—the androids on Earth. Rick sets out to distinguish androids and humans by administering an empathy test. This is what I believe will be the heart of the ethical questions raised by this book and the questions we will look to answer in class.
What makes a human human? Is it empathy? The government seems to think so as it administers the Voigt-Kampff test which measures a subject’s reaction to emotionally stimulating descriptions. Those androids which do not respond appropriately to emotional stimuli are to be retired. The government’s reasoning for this may be that the androids would behave as human sociopaths do, who are “incapable of empathy.” (Anthology, 275E) While this may have some reasonable backing, my empathetic mind kicked in—I still felt that it would be wrong for any androids to be killed, regardless of their emotional intelligence. This also reminded me of our class reading about the “man with no feeling.” Although I do not believe it is possible for androids to honestly change their empathetic approach (correct me if I’m wrong), humans have the ability to change how they empathize and also vary in empathy levels. Although some people “seem to lack feelings altogether,” they may only be lacking an understanding of their feelings or “lack word[s]” for them. (Anthology, 275A) When approaching these types of people, I think it is best to try to understand their situation. The fact that they appear cold or harsh is not by choice but by nature. We may try to change their outlook, but we could also just simply try to deal with their level of emotional intelligence.
Empathy, the ability to feel for others.
I would also call into question whether lack of emotional intelligence is enough to deem someone, or something even, unworthy. I think this cannot possibly be the case. While the level of emotion being tested by Rick’s test is distinctly human that does not necessarily mean that it is the most valuable human criteria. I am not yet sure what is, but I feel that this book may help us understand that humanity is a multifaceted and intrinsically complex identity. What is it about us that even the most advanced computers and technology couldn’t capture? 
This book will cause us to question the role of emotion.
I believe we might be able to relate this question of empathy to the idea of speciesism and proper treatment for animals. Although I am not positive of my stance on other animals’ capacity for empathy—I believe that they probably exhibit it at some level—they may be compared by some to the androids, creatures whose levels of compassion are “below” our own. If I felt that androids deserved their lives, by the same logic animals definitely do. It is precisely because of our emotional intelligence that we have the responsibility to honor all other lives. To say that things must be “retired” because they are lacking empathy is an ironic disregard of empathy and compassion. I will be interested to see how this issue plays out in the rest of the book.
Perhaps unrelated, I also noticed the role animals played in Dick’s fictional world. Rick and the other humans remaining on Earth desperately want to take care of animals, even though they serve no real purpose. It is interesting (and highly positive) to me that animals play such an important role in the culture of these people. One might think that in a world where even humans are struggling to exist, humans may attempt to take as much land and as many resources as they can and kick the animals out. In actuality, the opposite occurs. This supports my belief that people need animals to feel whole. Rick relates the grief he felt as he read the “perpetual animal obits,” (Dick, 42) until he couldn’t take it anymore and stopped reading them entirely. He also mentions how taking care of animals was once part of the law. Rick’s desire to become connected with an animal is evidenced through talking to his neighbor, Barbour, (Dick, 12) about his electric sheep and the bribe the Rosen Company made with the owl (Dick, 56). The relationship presented is not an ideal one as the motives behind keeping animals—perhaps as a sign of social status—are related, but it is still evidence that animals play a crucial role in human existence. 
People needed animals so badly that they took care of electric ones.
No comments:
Post a Comment