Abstract
Technical perception systems exhibit essential differences in comparison with human perception systems. Technical perception systems comprise geometry, numbers, and images. But humans can define only a very small portion of space by means of technically abstract values. Far more important are topologies of personal meanings rooted in cultural meanings. This leads to several problems. Humanoid robots are endowed with complex technical perception systems, unfolding a paradox: They are being developed for the most intimate areas of human existence, but they cannot participate in the human sphere of perception. Therefore, we have developed an approach that connects robotic and human perception systems. Humanoid robots are then understood as “companions”. The object of our approach is to develop a cultural model of space, involving robots, AI, and humans within the same context of meaning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.
Coeckelbergh, M. (2011). Humans, animals, and robots: A phenomenological approach to human-robot relations. International Journal of Social Robotics, 3, 197–204.
Coeckelbergh, M. (2012). Growing moral relations: Critique of moral status ascription. Palgrave Macmillan.
Coeckelbergh, M., & Gunkel, D. J. (2014). Facing animals: A relational, other-oriented approach to moral standing. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 27.
Dautenhahn, K. (2007). Methodology and themes of human-robot interaction: A growing research field. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems.
Derrida, J. (2002). The animal that therefore I am (More to follow). Critical Inquiry, 28(2), 369–418.
Duffy, B. R. (2003). Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3), 177–190.
Haraway, D. (2008). When species meet. University of Minnesota Press.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Blackwell.
Lin, P., Abney, K., & Bekey, G. A. (Eds.). (2015). Robot Ethics. MIT-Press.
Simondon, G. (2012). Die Existenzweise technischer Objekte. Zürich, diaphanes.
Winner, L. (1987). Do artifacts have politics?. The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wittgenstein, L. (2001). Philosophische Untersuchungen. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft Frankfurt.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schürer, O., Müller, C., Hubatschke, C., Stangl, B. (2018). Space-Game: Domestication of Humanoid Robots and AI by Generating a Cultural Space Model of Intra-action Between Human and Robot. In: Karafillidis, A., Weidner, R. (eds) Developing Support Technologies. Biosystems & Biorobotics, vol 23. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01836-8_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01836-8_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01835-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01836-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)