Lore Talk: The Moral Conundrum of Umbra and the New Theory of Warframe Genesis (spoilers)

[Tyreaus]

21 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

While he sure thinks that he did, we don't actually see Umbra kill Isaah, this is kind of an off camera assumption. Killing reams of soldiers and proxies says absolutely nothing, as the Tenno does this before breakfast on a regular day. Umbra attacking the operator is kind of the definition of the fight or (in this case and) flight response pretty much any animal would have in a stressful situation, like suddenly waking up in a strange ship with a stranger trying to get into your mind. None of these really indicate spectacular violence. And whether the Infested's violent behavior carries over to the frames is certainly debatable.

The point I'm getting at is that your concerns are based on an assumption—Umbra's complete retention of will, untarnished—for which it seems you've yet to present evidence. I am going to skip over this conjecture because it's just that: conjecture on conjecture. We can talk about "maybe-this" or "maybe-that" all day. I've pointed to cases where the most parsimonious explanation is that of the Infestation affecting the individual's mind, which calls into question the basis of your moral conundrum.

If you can show that Umbra retained an untarnished will equivalent to your own prior to the Tenno's intervention, then you might have something. Otherwise, you're worrying about what basically boils down to a "maybe", and a reasonably distant one at that.

21 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

But that is exactly my point, the player does not ask Umbra to do anything. Either he is entirely free with no intervention, or you press 5 and take direct control of his body, with no discussion involved. Taking direct control of a vehicle, without the express permission of other people on said vehicle, could be called a hijacking.

Barring my poor phrasing of "mindlessly violent"—which I don't think detracts from the point that the Tenno have shown to, at most, decrease the violence within an individual rather than provoke it—I have to point out that verbal communication is not the only method by which creatures can talk, especially when we're considering Void-slinging children. Just because some communication isn't rendered either visually or orally does not entail it doesn't exist. To rely on "if I didn't see it, it didn't happen" is, simply, fallacious.

Edited October 4, 2018 by Tyreaus

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

Alright, I am sufficiently puzzled. How does this battery of questions apply to the original discussion of whether giving Warframes sentience creates a moral grey area, versus leaving them as unthinking tools?

Simple, if you want to debate over whether another being is sentient and thus poses a moral issue, then you must be able to determine what sentience is. If you can't prove yourself sentient beyond all doubt, how can you expect us to trust your determination of sentience in others? Also if Ordis is self-aware and you are constantly ordering him around, and even forced him to read the vitruvian, damaging him despite the fact he told you that he didn't want to, and you should destroy it, doesn't your moral quandary predate your use of Umbra? 

 

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

Isaah dies? This is so incredibly vague, that it is unknown who kills him, or honestly if he even truly dies at all

You confirm that "you" killed him to, the man in the wall. 

 

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

Umbra tracks and attacks Ballas on Lua, gets exploded by Sentients, is dead

Tries to attack. Didn't. 

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

Umbra is remade by us, attacks us and escapes

Successfully attacks. 

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

 Umbra tracks and attacks Ballas on Lua, again

Fails to attack, again. 

 

His ability to attack is not in question, it's his ability to attack Ballas, and whether that shows that Ballas is capable of controlling even a killing machine in the throes of blood lust. Wetheral that control is from his Dax conditioning, his transference bolt or warframe programming, Ballas did retain that level of control for hundreds of years. 

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

The modified transference bolt does two things, neither giving Ballas control of Umbra: it allows Ballas to communicate with the unnamed soldier quasi telepathically so that Isaah does not hear these words, and it seems to play a role in why Umbra retained his sentience and memories through the conversion.

Please show where you got this bit about only these two things being done by the bolt?

1 hour ago, Knowmad762 said:

Umbra is very new to the lore, and I would be very impressed if the writers ever gave him the ability to use his sentience to disagree with the Tenno. That would be incredibly difficult from a technical programming perspective, but I suppose we shall see.

Just because someone has the ability to disagree with you, doesn't mean that they will. Just because they don't disagree at any point doesn't mean that they can't. 

[Knowmad762]

1 hour ago, Tyreaus said:

The point I'm getting at is that your concerns are based on an assumption—Umbra's complete retention of will, untarnished—for which it seems you've yet to present evidence. I am going to skip over this conjecture because it's just that: conjecture on conjecture. We can talk about "maybe-this" or "maybe-that" all day. I've pointed to cases where the most parsimonious explanation is that of the Infestation affecting the individual's mind, which calls into question the basis of your moral conundrum.

If you can show that Umbra retained an untarnished will equivalent to your own prior to the Tenno's intervention, then you might have something. Otherwise, you're worrying about what basically boils down to a "maybe", and a reasonably distant one at that.

The point I am getting at is that any retention of will at all, tarnished or otherwise, creates a moral conundrum. I did not present evidence, as I was under the impression that Umbra's sentience is a well established fact. Why does an "untarnished will equivalent to my own" matter at all? Are you saying that if one person is less intelligent than another, the less intelligent person rightfully has less access to free will?

 

1 hour ago, Tyreaus said:

I have to point out that verbal communication is not the only method by which creatures can talk, especially when we're considering Void-slinging children. Just because some communication isn't rendered either visually or orally does not entail it doesn't exist. To rely on "if I didn't see it, it didn't happen" is, simply, fallacious. 

I have to point out that relying on "if i didn't see it, it did happen because space magic", is an equal but opposite fallacy.

[Knowmad762]

1 hour ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Simple, if you want to debate over whether another being is sentient and thus poses a moral issue, then you must be able to determine what sentience is. If you can't prove yourself sentient beyond all doubt, how can you expect us to trust your determination of sentience in others? Also if Ordis is self-aware and you are constantly ordering him around, and even forced him to read the vitruvian, damaging him despite the fact he told you that he didn't want to, and you should destroy it, doesn't your moral quandary predate your use of Umbra? 

Untrue. You do not have to trust my determination of sentience at all, you simply have to agree with the commonly accepted notion that the human mind is sentient. If you do agree with that notion, then there is a moral issue because the idea that Warframes are made from human subjects means that any residual consciousness is from that sentient human mind, and therefore must also be sentient.

 

1 hour ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

You confirm that "you" killed him to, the man in the wall. 

The interaction with Wally throws doubt on the situation, not clarity. He asks if that is what you remember of the event, he does not ask if that is how the event actually occurred. That seems like a pretty important distinction, as a memory of an event, especially from a solitary perspective, can vary wildly from what actually occurred. And since Rell described Wally as amoral, it seems possible that Wally would take an opportunity to mess with the Tenno, just because. Like perhaps, having them believe something that is not entirely true.

 

1 hour ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

His ability to attack is not in question, it's his ability to attack Ballas, and whether that shows that Ballas is capable of controlling even a killing machine in the throes of blood lust. Wetheral that control is from his Dax conditioning, his transference bolt or warframe programming, Ballas did retain that level of control for hundreds of years. 

I am genuinely curious, what evidence have you seen that Umbra was active for hundreds of years? There is so little information about him, it is plausible that he was created, attacked Ballas, and was destroyed on the same day. Without any real references to him, he could have just been dead for the hundreds of years until the Tenno rebuilt him.

[Tyreaus]

19 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

The point I am getting at is that any retention of will at all, tarnished or otherwise, creates a moral conundrum. I did not present evidence, as I was under the impression that Umbra's sentience is a well established fact. Why does an "untarnished will equivalent to my own" matter at all? Are you saying that if one person is less intelligent than another, the less intelligent person rightfully has less access to free will?

A retention of sentience doesn't, by itself, support a moral conundrum. To reiterate: if the Operator is going to ask "do you want to go murder some Grineer today" and Umbra is guaranteed to say "yes" (perhaps because the Infestation has corrupted his will in that specific manner—note how this "tarnishes" Umbra's will) then he both A: has sentience and B: has a form of will that would never manifest your moral conundrum.

So that's the first thing to establish: does Umbra have sentience in the right manner to present this conundrum? If we don't know, that's fine, we slap a conditional on it. "If Umbra is fully sentient, then this may be bad", for example. But there's a gigantic difference between "x is bad" and "if y, then x is bad".

27 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

I have to point out that relying on "if i didn't see it, it did happen because space magic", is an equal but opposite fallacy.

I did not say that. I said only that it's possible, and thus to claim it didn't occur as a matter-of-fact only on the basis that you didn't see or hear it is flawed reasoning.

What I am giving you are counter-examples. These are not claims of any matter-of-fact. Not everyone who posits the "brain in a vat" scenario to debate epistemology actually believes we're all brains in vats. It is, like my own posts, an example to illustrate a flaw in some particular reasoning or claim.

[(XBOX)DShinShoryuken]

Zombies

Clones

Time revenants

When does a human stop being a human and becomes a moving mass of flesh? This is a video game troupe that has gone on since Pac-Man started eating ghosts. 

If the Warframes are humans (most chances say yes), what do we know about their viewpoint inside the Frames. For all we know, they could be getting commands from a different view that they are soldiers fighting a war against alien invaders and they are in their own Second Dream different than the Tenno. 

Mayhaps one day, DE will make a mindscape for each of the Frames for us to go into and interact with to see what they know. In the meantime, the best way to view it is that there is a common goal of working togetherness that the two aspects share. There is not much difference between a Frame being human that we control and the armies we send out in War Simulations or the hordes of Undead we destroy in Zombie games. Hek, we could look at our Tenno as being a slave if we wanted to since we control them and they have no free will to dress or get out of that chair unless we command it. Imagine going into a game and telling the "hero" that you have been commanding them all their lives. 

If you enjoy the game, find a peaceful way of viewing the Frames til DE spills the beams on how they are feeling inside. If you do not like the game, give them a evil disposition and do what you must to play or not. Either way, people are gonna play and wait to get more lore and storyline. 

Cheers

[Knowmad762]

2 hours ago, Tyreaus said:

A retention of sentience doesn't, by itself, support a moral conundrum. To reiterate: if the Operator is going to ask "do you want to go murder some Grineer today" and Umbra is guaranteed to say "yes" (perhaps because the Infestation has corrupted his will in that specific manner—note how this "tarnishes" Umbra's will) then he both A: has sentience and B: has a form of will that would never manifest your moral conundrum.

So that's the first thing to establish: does Umbra have sentience in the right manner to present this conundrum? If we don't know, that's fine, we slap a conditional on it. "If Umbra is fully sentient, then this may be bad", for example. But there's a gigantic difference between "x is bad" and "if y, then x is bad".

Okay, so let's use your conditional and word it thus: if Umbra's sentient mind disagrees with what the Tenno is doing in any way, then taking control of his body and making him take part in it anyway is bad. That is a really tricky conditional to fill, especially because Umbra has a human mind, which is pretty famous for being inconsistent. Let's be honest, from an objective point of view, the Tenno's justifications for killing ludicrous numbers of other beings is often pretty dubious. And the game tries to implement a morality system, so what happens if you choose to be a "dark side" Tenno, but Umbra disagrees with that path? If Umbra is truly sentient, as he is described, it seems silly and unrealistic to assume that he would agree unconditionally with everything the Tenno does all the time. And so if y is not met ever, then x is really bad, because the transference system allows you to essentially override Umbra's free will with no real negative consequence, and thus, moral conundrum.

[Knowmad762]

9 minutes ago, (XB1)DShinShoryuken said:

If you enjoy the game, find a peaceful way of viewing the Frames til DE spills the beams on how they are feeling inside. If you do not like the game, give them a evil disposition and do what you must to play or not. Either way, people are gonna play and wait to get more lore and storyline. 

I actually agree.

Lord knows that there are already several moral grey areas in this game, I guess I just question if it is wise to add another one. It seems so odd to me that I even have to consider that my BA weapons platform might have feelings inside. It just seemed so much simpler when the Warframe was nothing but an unthinking tool, and I fear that this new idea might put off potential new players who are not really cool with playing Mind Control Simulator 2K18.

But who knows; perhaps I am jumping the gun and there is some massive piece of lore in the future that makes it all make more sense.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

4 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

Let's be honest, from an objective point of view, the Tenno's justifications for killing ludicrous numbers of other beings is often pretty dubious. And the game tries to implement a morality system, so what happens if you choose to be a "dark side" Tenno, but Umbra disagrees with that path? If Umbra is truly sentient, as he is described, it seems silly and unrealistic to assume that he would agree unconditionally with everything the Tenno does all the time. 

I think that your issue with Umbra potentially disagreeing with you has more to do with your own disagreement with your actions. Dax follow orders to quote a phrase used by humans at least as far back as Tennyson:

"Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die." 

Do you question whether the men of the Light Brigade were in agreement with Cardigan on that day? I doubt that any of those men had any misconceptions as to the probable outcome of such a manoeuvre, but they did it anyway knowing only that it was ordered. 

When my doctor orders me to bed rest, I may not agree, or wish to follow the instruction, but I do it anyway. Does that make the doctor a cruel tyrant, or is my agency an overriding factor? Unless someone specifically asks me and receives a reply, then the world will never know. Any conclusion we come to may be wrong unless you can get Umbra to specifically tell you that he doesn't want to be doing this. 

The fact that he continues to fight by my side when I no longer have control of him, is enough for me. 

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

Untrue. You do not have to trust my determination of sentience at all, you simply have to agree with the commonly accepted notion that the human mind is sentient. If you do agree with that notion, then there is a moral issue because the idea that Warframes are made from human subjects means that any residual consciousness is from that sentient human mind, and therefore must also be sentient.

But there's the rub you see, are you a human at all? There's no way for me to know that. For all I know you are a figment of someone's imagination, a program they've made to try and pass a Turing test. 

Was Ordis human? Is he now? Are the Corpus who have had their heads replaced? Are the warframes, who have had infections affect their minds? How do we tell? 

6 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

The interaction with Wally throws doubt on the situation, not clarity. He asks if that is what you remember of the event, he does not ask if that is how the event actually occurred. That seems like a pretty important distinction, as a memory of an event, especially from a solitary perspective, can vary wildly from what actually occurred. And since Rell described Wally as amoral, it seems possible that Wally would take an opportunity to mess with the Tenno, just because. Like perhaps, having them believe something that is not entirely true.

I disagree. From my perspective the only thing that he meant was what Ordis told us about not being able to change the past, if I killed him then Umbra didn't. I remember doing it, despite it having happened already when I couldn't possibly have done it. It was an acknowledgement of my subjective reality being the one that counts: "However I remember it, is how it happened."

6 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

I am genuinely curious, what evidence have you seen that Umbra was active for hundreds of years? There is so little information about him, it is plausible that he was created, attacked Ballas, and was destroyed on the same day. Without any real references to him, he could have just been dead for the hundreds of years until the Tenno rebuilt him.

Ballas should have created Umbra around the time of the Old War when he showed his level of control that we observed in the memories. Whether active or destroyed and dumped in a corner of a room on Lua, the events at the end of the sacrifice occur hundreds of years after that. Umbra was still unable to act against Ballas at that time without our direct intervention. 

Controlled, hundreds of years pass, still controlled. Control was retained. 

[Tyreaus]

7 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

Okay, so let's use your conditional and word it thus: if Umbra's sentient mind disagrees with what the Tenno is doing in any way, then taking control of his body and making him take part in it anyway is bad.

I think most would agree.

7 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

That is a really tricky conditional to fill, especially because Umbra has a human mind, which is pretty famous for being inconsistent.

Given the introduction of Infestation, the "human mind" aspect becomes dubious. For sake of argument, we can roll with this.

7 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

Let's be honest, from an objective point of view, the Tenno's justifications for killing ludicrous numbers of other beings is often pretty dubious.

Completely different topic altogether, not relevant to your moral dilemma. (And just because someone is immoral does not entail everything they do is immoral, otherwise it'd be immoral for us to breathe since that's also what mass murderers do...)

7 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

And the game tries to implement a morality system, so what happens if you choose to be a "dark side" Tenno, but Umbra disagrees with that path?

Again: if it is possible for Umbra to do so, at least in a manner that is evident to viewers. See next para.

7 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

If Umbra is truly sentient, as he is described, it seems silly and unrealistic to assume that he would agree unconditionally with everything the Tenno does all the time.

See previous sentences on "if it is possible for him to disagree" and "given the introduction of the Infestation" that complicate the entire matter of Umbra's capability to disagree.

This is also assuming, as others have pointed out, there isn't some kind of command structure whereby Umbra may disagree but has voluntarily relinquished control in trust of the Tenno the same way soldiers might relinquish their own sort of control or employees of companies might do similar (indeed, the cutscene just before acquiring Umbra seems to imply that rather than subjugate, the wills of the Tenno and Umbra harmonize). From any outside perspective that we are, thusfar, privy to, any of those arrangements would look identical, yet it is highly questionable to consider the latter cases "hijacking" when they are, at minimum, preceded by voluntary choice. If you wanted to ensure you actually had a moral dilemma given those possibilities, you'd have to establish that, despite voluntary enlistment and hiring, employment and military duty are also morally dubious subjugations of one's will (thus, no matter what the arrangement is, Tenno are "hijacking" Umbra's will).

You're going to have a field day with that, I assure you.

Moreover, we have to also consider that we play only a snapshot of Tenno / Warframe relations. Even if Warframes may disagree with Operators, the topics on which they disagree may lie wholly outside of gameplay. Perhaps they play Gomi inside Umbra's head and they argue over who plays black. We, clearly, are not privy to every single interaction between them, so we must specify that it is not "agreement all the time" but "agreement in particular instances". There's a canyon's worth of difference between someone who agrees with you on politics, for example, and someone who agrees with you on literally everything.

7 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

And so if y is not met ever, then x is really bad, because the transference system allows you to essentially override Umbra's free will with no real negative consequence, and thus, moral conundrum.

Bolded part is not demonstrated. First part before that is...something I don't even understand what you're getting at.

---

To make this clear:

You're arguing that Tenno's use of Warframes is morally dubious because Tenno subjugate the wills of Warframes.

So show us. Provide evidence. Give a solid argument (not conjecture) that addresses counter-examples or alternate explanations.

Edited October 4, 2018 by Tyreaus

[Knowmad762]

5 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

I think that your issue with Umbra potentially disagreeing with you has more to do with your own disagreement with your actions. Dax follow orders to quote a phrase used by humans at least as far back as Tennyson:

"Theirs not to make reply, Theirs not to reason why, Theirs but to do and die." 

Do you question whether the men of the Light Brigade were in agreement with Cardigan on that day? I doubt that any of those men had any misconceptions as to the probable outcome of such a manoeuvre, but they did it anyway knowing only that it was ordered. 

When my doctor orders me to bed rest, I may not agree, or wish to follow the instruction, but I do it anyway. Does that make the doctor a cruel tyrant, or is my agency an overriding factor? Unless someone specifically asks me and receives a reply, then the world will never know. Any conclusion we come to may be wrong unless you can get Umbra to specifically tell you that he doesn't want to be doing this. 

The fact that he continues to fight by my side when I no longer have control of him, is enough for me.  

I suppose I pictured the Tenno's relationship with Umbra as a partnership between relative equals. But sure, let's covert it to a commander/soldier dynamic. Now you have have to deal with the fine line between a benevolent leader and a cruel tyrant, and where the Tenno falls on that line. Sure, you can look at history and find some examples of loyal soldiers charging into death based on absolute belief in the rightness of their leader and/or their cause. But from that every same history you can find countless examples of corrupt and amoral leaders using lies/deceit/exploitation to send soldiers to incredibly morally questionable deaths. Using this dynamic causes at least as many problems as it solves.

Because the Tenno want to be better than the Orokin, it seems that they would care if Umbra's sentient mind disagreed with any actions they are taking together. The Tenno has a fairly large degree of freedom in how they conduct their activities, and because Umbra has a sentient human mind, it just seems logical that he would disagree with something sometime. The fact that he does not currently disagree in game seems like largely a technical programming restriction, that does not mean that it doesn't create a problem in the lore going forward.

Your doctor can order you to do all sorts of things, but unless your doctor has the ability to enter your mind and force your body to follow those orders whether you agree or not, it hardly seems relevant to the situation.

5 hours ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

But there's the rub you see, are you a human at all? There's no way for me to know that. For all I know you are a figment of someone's imagination, a program they've made to try and pass a Turing test. 

Was Ordis human? Is he now? Are the Corpus who have had their heads replaced? Are the warframes, who have had infections affect their minds? How do we tell? 

Again, my humanity is irrelevant. Go ahead and assume that I am an alien consciousness that has hacked into your puny human internet from Alpha Centauri; it literally does not matter in this context.

Ordis and the Solaris are both interesting cases in their own rights, but again, are outside the scope of this discussion.

The only relevant thing is whether or not you agree that a human mind is sentient. If Warframes are now made from humans, and something of that human mind remains, it must also be regarded as sentient by default.

[Knowmad762]

3 hours ago, Tyreaus said:

To make this clear:

You're arguing that Tenno's use of Warframes is morally dubious because Tenno subjugate the wills of Warframes.

So show us. Provide evidence. Give a solid argument (not conjecture) that addresses counter-examples or alternate explanations.

Excalibur Umbra has intact sentience born of a human mind, thus making him the first true Warframe that is not an object but a person. Information from The Sacrifice quest confirms that other Warframes are made from human subjects, and thus the very real possibility that other Waframes also share the trait of being a person rather than an object. The nature of Tenno transference allows them to take control of a Warframe seemingly whenever they wish, and use it to act out their will however they wish. Using transference on a Warframe that is a person is, by definition, the removal of the free will of another sentient being. There is uncertainty of how intact the human mind of these Warframes is, but because we are dealing with the very serious subjugation of free will, this needs to be handled very carefully, as in following the legal precedent of "innocent until proven guilty". Meaning that if any Warframe shows any signs of a residual human mind at all, it needs to immediately be respected as an independent sentient being, and using transference on them in that state is morally questionable. Only once it can be proven beyond any reasonable doubt that the Warframe's humanity and sentience are well and truly lost, can transference be used on them freely for the (highly subjective) greater good. In the case of Excalibur Umbra, this complete loss of humanity is not proven, rather quite the opposite.

There is much discussion of Infestation corrupting Umbra's human mind to the point that it is no longer human at all, and thus its inherent sentience can be justly ignored. To that I submit the scene in The Sacrifice where Umbra is seen absolutely overcome with grief over the loss of his son. Sure, some grief like behaviors have been seen in animals in nature, but the sheer magnitude of his grief clearly mark it as the complex emotional state currently only achievable by the human mind. Since I have never seen an Infested creature in game show any grief in any way, this is a glaring example of Umbra's sentience and humanity standing resolute despite any effects of the Infestation. Thus, Umbra is still a person, and should be granted the basic right of free will, and to usurp that free will via transference whenever the Tenno wishes, is morally questionable.

The other path around the moral conundrum is via consent. Yes, employers can order their employees to do all sorts of things, but the right to refuse being put in a dangerous situation is a pretty basic employee right, and the employee can generally leave that relationship at any time they wish. Soldiers are also relatively free to leave the military should they have the will to do so. Does Umbra have the ability to refuse consent to transference? This concept would be incredibly hard to communicate within the programming of the game, so he currently does not, and we are left with the rather messy idea that he simply implies consent in all situations unequivocally. While not inherently wrong, this is at least questionable, as it just seems illogical that a sentient human mind (as demonstrated by Umbra) would allow his own body to be used for whatever the Tenno wishes, always and without question.

 

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

 

Again, my humanity is irrelevant. Go ahead and assume that I am an alien consciousness that has hacked into your puny human internet from Alpha Centauri; it literally does not matter in this context.

 

Alien or human is not the issue. I'm telling you that you need to prove that you're a conscious being at all, and not just a simulacrum that mimics sentience through a complex algorithm that makes replies based on the input I send you. If you can't prove that you are a self aware consciousness beyond a shadow of a doubt, how should you be considered a good judge of consciousness in others? 

You say that Umbra remains conscious, but seem to recognise that it is a fragment of what he was as a Dax. The infested horde seem to be able to coordinate their bodies, the lotus has mentioned that some of their actions seem coordinated.

The infested Mesa created by Alad V was as able to act apparently autonomously, as Umbra does. Was it conscious? Cephalon Jordas was affected somehow. Is he self aware, or was the infestation complex enough to reprogram him, or is it both? 

 

[Knowmad762]

39 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Alien or human is not the issue. I'm telling you that you need to prove that you're a conscious being at all, and not just a simulacrum that mimics sentience through a complex algorithm that makes replies based on the input I send you. If you can't prove that you are a self aware consciousness beyond a shadow of a doubt, how should you be considered a good judge of consciousness in others? 

You say that Umbra remains conscious, but seem to recognise that it is a fragment of what he was as a Dax. The infested horde seem to be able to coordinate their bodies, the lotus has mentioned that some of their actions seem coordinated.

The infested Mesa created by Alad V was as able to act apparently autonomously, as Umbra does. Was it conscious? Cephalon Jordas was affected somehow. Is he self aware, or was the infestation complex enough to reprogram him, or is it both?  

Again, within the confines of this discussion, I do not need to judge consciousness in others at all. The infested horde, infested Mesa and Cephalon Jordas are all unique circumstances, that would indeed require judging of consciousness individually, but they all fall outside the scope of this discussion.

Umbra was a human before the conversion. Humans are generally regarded as fully sentient beings; this is not my judgement, as I am but an alien consciousness from Alpha Centauri, but the commonly held belief in human society. After the conversion, Umbra's humanity clearly remains, which means that the same assumption of sentience from before the conversion still applies, until such time that it can be proven beyond any reasonable doubt that Umbra's humanity is well and truly gone. I recognize that Umbra's mind was affected by the conversion, but to call him a fragment of what he was before is not entirely fair, as I don't believe there is enough evidence to gauge if he is equal or lesser than what he was before.

To put it another way, take an ordinary human. This human would be considered fully sentient, as that is the generally held notion in human society. Now say this sentient human develops retrograde amnesia. Their brain function is largely unchanged, other than the fact that they cannot remember events prior to a certain date. You seem to think that because something in their mind has been affected (and, in your words, they become a fragment of what they were before), that this human now requires some form of testing and judgement to asses if they are still a self aware, sentient consciousness. I say that is completely unnecessary, and the assumption of sentience from before the amnesia is still completely valid, as they very obviously still shows signs of having a functional human mind.

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

13 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

Again, within the confines of this discussion, I do not need to judge consciousness in others at all. 

But someone surely must. And what applies to you also applies to me. Perhaps I am a butterfly having a very strange dream after drinking nectar from the wrong flower. 

It's one thing to claim that someone has human level consciousness and a totally different thing to prove it. (see Turing tests, Chinese rooms, etc etc etc) 

 

Your attempt to compare Umbra to an amnesiac patient, is noted but by the same token you used, there is no proof that he retains any more self awareness than my kubrow which does not appear to have ever been a human being. Both respond to stimuli in complex ways. Demanding that one is conscious and thus creates a moral dilemma if he were to ever not wish to do what I wish done, but not the other? I don't see how that can work. 

22 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

I say that is completely unnecessary, and the assumption of sentience from before the amnesia is still completely valid, as they very obviously still shows signs of having a functional human mind.

But is that the case for Umbra does he show that he has a complete, functional consciousness? 

[Knowmad762]

11 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

But someone surely must. And what applies to you also applies to me. Perhaps I am a butterfly having a very strange dream after drinking nectar from the wrong flower. 

It's one thing to claim that someone has human level consciousness and a totally different thing to prove it. (see Turing tests, Chinese rooms, etc etc etc) 

 

Your attempt to compare Umbra to an amnesiac patient, is noted but by the same token you used, there is no proof that he retains any more self awareness than my kubrow which does not appear to have ever been a human being. Both respond to stimuli in complex ways. Demanding that one is conscious and thus creates a moral dilemma if he were to ever not wish to do what I wish done, but not the other? I don't see how that can work. 

People far smarter than I have ruled that humans are sentient, and i simply see no reason to disagree. Intelligent behaviors don't automatically indicate sentience, although there is some correlation. Whether Kubrow, or IRL dogs for that matter, are sentient or not is certainly debateable, again I feel that debate wanders pretty far off topic.

 

14 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

But is that the case for Umbra does he show that he has a complete, functional consciousness? 

As mentioned, he displays grief, which is generally regarded as an exclusively human complex emotion. He also formulates a plan to attack Ballas, which involves navigating and transporting himself to at least three separate planets (Ceres, Neptune, and Lua), all completely independently. Has any other Warframe ever done this? Has your maybe self aware Kubrow?

[Tyreaus]

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

Excalibur Umbra has intact sentience born of a human mind, thus making him the first true Warframe that is not an object but a person. Information from The Sacrifice quest confirms that other Warframes are made from human subjects, and thus the very real possibility that other Waframes also share the trait of being a person rather than an object.

True.

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

The nature of Tenno transference allows them to take control of a Warframe seemingly whenever they wish, and use it to act out their will however they wish. Using transference on a Warframe that is a person is, by definition, the removal of the free will of another sentient being.

Please demonstrate this process is the case.

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

...as in following the legal precedent of "innocent until proven guilty". Meaning that if any Warframe shows any signs of a residual human mind at all, it needs to immediately be respected as an independent sentient being, and using transference on them in that state is morally questionable.

1. Only if the quotation above is demonstrated.

2. Law is not morality. One need not look terribly far into the history of the US to find blatant dichotomies between the two.

3. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal precedent regarding accusation, not personhood. It does not apply to human rights overall. Respecting anything as an independent sentient being is done on the basis of it displaying independence, sentience, and existence. Umbra fulfills these via in-game evidence.

(As an aside, 3 is particularly pertinent regarding advanced artificial intelligence. It is likely that we will create advanced, person-like AI before legal precedents are in place to protect them. Those legal precedents are, thus, likely to arise from moral considerations. Or at least they should, as the alternative is robot rebellion, and I'm sure we all know the general idea behind the Terminator franchise...)

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

There is much discussion of Infestation corrupting Umbra's human mind to the point that it is no longer human at all, and thus its inherent sentience can be justly ignored...

To be clear: Umbra being non-human is not what I have used as any sort of counter-example. Moral cases can be made against the subjugation of creatures with lower sentience anyway, so even if Umbra was not human, that would not shut down debate.

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

Does Umbra have the ability to refuse consent to transference? This concept would be incredibly hard to communicate within the programming of the game, so he currently does not

This is an argument from ignorance and is thus is not a valid component of your overall argument.

5 hours ago, Knowmad762 said:

as it just seems illogical that a sentient human mind (as demonstrated by Umbra) would allow his own body to be used for whatever the Tenno wishes, always and without question.

As mentioned: current displays in game are at most a snapshot of some of Tenno / Warframe relationships, and you have thusfar not demonstrated that this snapshot can be generalized to all such interactions (or at least key interactions wherein it creates a moral issue, such as some kind of initial consent).

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

29 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

People far smarter than I have ruled that humans are sentient, and i simply see no reason to disagree.

But were they themselves sentient to be able to judge? And what did they say about Excalibur Umbra in his current form? 

29 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

As mentioned, he displays grief, which is generally regarded as an exclusively human complex emotion.

Crows have been thought to be showing grief when congregating (murdering?) at the site of a dead crow. Last I heard it is now believed that they are simply trying to determine what danger caused it to die, the better to avoid the danger in the future. It is a very difficult thing to look at the action of another and determine the cause or motivation. 

31 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

He also formulates a plan to attack Ballas, which involves navigating and transporting himself to at least three separate planets (Ceres, Neptune, and Lua), all completely independently. Has any other Warframe ever done this? Has your maybe self aware Kubrow?

My Kubrows do formulate attacks even when I don't always want them to, and do appear to teleport themselves sometimes. They can also open locked containers without apparent opposable thumbs! I have a special kavat that is able to follow rather specific instructions while doing all of those. If you mean the apparent complexity of the plans, then you're arguing about the degree and little more. 

 

If Umbra were truly self aware and not just acting on instinct, wouldn't he have known that he can't kill Ballas, and so simply avoided him instead of embarking on a mission where he has no hope of succeeding? 

[Knowmad762]

8 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

Please demonstrate this process is the case.

Johnny Tenno is on a mission with Excalibur Umbra. Johnny is physically in the theater of combat in operator form, and thus Umbra is freely operating under his own sentient mind. A particular Grineer Heavy Gunner keeps shooting Umbra from afar, he is getting annoyed and really wants to kill that Grineer in retribution. Umbra maneuvers himself for a clear shot at his nemesis, but before he gets a chance to fire, Johnny presses 5, assumes control of Umbra's body and immediately runs to extraction. Umbra's free will sufficiently quashed, the Grineer Heavy Gunner laughs in triumph.

I'm not sure why this needs to be drawn out. Whenever the Tenno is in control of Umbra's body, logic dictates that Umbra is not in control of Umbra's body. How can Umbra execute his free will, if he loses control of his very body to the Tenno?

22 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

3. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal precedent regarding accusation, not personhood. It does not apply to human rights overall. Respecting anything as an independent sentient being is done on the basis of it displaying independence, sentience, and existence. Umbra fulfills these via in-game evidence.

Obviously, I do not mean that literally. I am borrowing the concept that there are no degrees of innocence: any chance of innocence, no matter how small, is treated the same as absolute innocence.This same concept should apply to sentience: if there is any sign of sentience, it should be treated as absolute sentience, and afforded the corresponding basic rights that entails.

 

28 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

As mentioned: current displays in game are at most a snapshot of some of Tenno / Warframe relationships, and you have thusfar not demonstrated that this snapshot can be generalized to all such interactions (or at least key interactions wherein it creates a moral issue, such as some kind of initial consent).

I completely agree. Right now we only have a tiny snapshot of the interactions between Tenno and sentient Warframes. That is precisely why I feel feedback is important right now, as the writers still have much time to influence this relationship in the future.

[Tyreaus]

3 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

Johnny Tenno is on a mission with Excalibur Umbra. Johnny is physically in the theater of combat in operator form, and thus Umbra is freely operating under his own sentient mind. A particular Grineer Heavy Gunner keeps shooting Umbra from afar, he is getting annoyed and really wants to kill that Grineer in retribution. Umbra maneuvers himself for a clear shot at his nemesis, but before he gets a chance to fire, Johnny presses 5, assumes control of Umbra's body and immediately runs to extraction. Umbra's free will sufficiently quashed, the Grineer Heavy Gunner laughs in triumph.

I'm not sure why this needs to be drawn out. Whenever the Tenno is in control of Umbra's body, logic dictates that Umbra is not in control of Umbra's body. How can Umbra execute his free will, if he loses control of his very body to the Tenno?

This description does not exclude alternate, equally probable yet morally acceptable explanations of this behaviour, e.g. military hierarchy or employment. Either A: you must demonstrate your explanation is better in some regard (more probable or more parsimonious, e.g.) or B: you must show that alternate explanations are flawed in some manner.

Also, be careful not to be circular. I asked to demonstrate that Tenno take control over Umbra. Your answer repeats "the Tenno takes control of Umbra".

8 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

Obviously, I do not mean that literally. I am borrowing the concept that there are no degrees of innocence: any chance of innocence, no matter how small, is treated the same as absolute innocence.This same concept should apply to sentience: if there is any sign of sentience, it should be treated as absolute sentience, and afforded the corresponding basic rights that entails.

I suggest you be judicious with what you argue, as your logic is starting to lump people with dogs to argue issues of free will and subjugation...

E.g., "If there is any sign of sentience, it should be treated as absolute sentience; creatures with absolute sentience, e.g. humans, should not be held against their will; therefore, it is immoral to keep animals indoors if they wish to go out."

[(PSN)guzmantt1977]

7 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

A particular Grineer Heavy Gunner keeps shooting Umbra from afar, he is getting annoyed and really wants to kill that Grineer in retribution. Umbra maneuvers himself for a clear shot at his nemesis, but before he gets a chance to fire, Johnny presses 5, assumes control of Umbra's body and immediately runs to extraction. Umbra's free will sufficiently quashed, the Grineer Heavy Gunner laughs in triumph.

Emphasis added in 3 places

1&2: You are attributing motives not actually stated to exist. 3, if the Tenno extracted successfully without killing the heavy gunner, the Grineer did not triumph, it survived, a difference exists. 

13 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

I am borrowing the concept that there are no degrees of innocence: any chance of innocence, no matter how small, is treated the same as absolute innocence.

The presumption of innocence is in no way a universal concept in law. Not even in the countries that claim to follow this rule. 

[Knowmad762]

16 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

But were they themselves sentient to be able to judge? And what did they say about Excalibur Umbra in his current form? 

If you do not agree with the widely accepted notion that human beings are sentient, then this discussion gets much more difficult, and I have no idea how to convince you of that.

 

20 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

Crows have been thought to be showing grief when congregating (murdering?) at the site of a dead crow. Last I heard it is now believed that they are simply trying to determine what danger caused it to die, the better to avoid the danger in the future. It is a very difficult thing to look at the action of another and determine the cause or motivation. 

Umbra's grief clearly goes through at least two distinct phases: intense anger, and deep melancholy. That alone makes it a far more complex emotional reaction than is observed in animals. And technically, we cheat, as the Tenno knows precisely the cause and motivation of that grief using the ability to see inside Umbra's mind. No determination is involved.

 

24 minutes ago, (PS4)guzmantt1977 said:

My Kubrows do formulate attacks even when I don't always want them to, and do appear to teleport themselves sometimes. They can also open locked containers without apparent opposable thumbs! I have a special kavat that is able to follow rather specific instructions while doing all of those. If you mean the apparent complexity of the plans, then you're arguing about the degree and little more. 

 

If Umbra were truly self aware and not just acting on instinct, wouldn't he have known that he can't kill Ballas, and so simply avoided him instead of embarking on a mission where he has no hope of succeeding? 

I don't know nearly enough about the minutiae of Kubrows and Kavats to even begin to determine if they are sentient. I would certainly debate it, but I fear the mods may see that as getting off topic. Interesting to note that the Tenno cannot use transference on either. I would be interested to see how the community reacted if this was made a possibility one day.

 

This does not seem like a deal breaker. Keep in mind that it is possible that hundreds of years have passed since Umbra attacked Ballas the first time. It is not unreasonable for him to think something has changed in their relationship, and that there is a possibility that it would end differently this time.

[Knowmad762]

13 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

Also, be careful not to be circular. I asked to demonstrate that Tenno take control over Umbra. Your answer repeats "the Tenno takes control of Umbra".

I don't really know how to make this more clear. Boot up Warframe. Go to your arsenal, equip Excalibur Umbra. Now your Tenno has control over your Umbra. Umbra can only move when you make him move. If his free will wants to go to the personal quarters to look at the fish, he cannot unless you (the Tenno) move him there. If he wants to do an extermination on Mars, but you (the Tenno) want to do a mobile defence on Pluto, chances are Umbra's body is going Pluto.

Why do you feel that the Tenno does not take control of Umbra, when they take control of Umbra?

 

19 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

I suggest you be judicious with what you argue, as your logic is starting to lump people with dogs to argue issues of free will and subjugation...

E.g., "If there is any sign of sentience, it should be treated as absolute sentience; creatures with absolute sentience, e.g. humans, should not be held against their will; therefore, it is immoral to keep animals indoors if they wish to go out."

Without getting too far into it, I don't see why these things have to be mutually exclusive. I will reserve my own judgement, but I believe many people would agree that it is immoral to keep an animal indoors if they wish to go out.

[Tyreaus]

1 minute ago, Knowmad762 said:

Why do you feel that the Tenno does not take control of Umbra, when they take control of Umbra?

Because your explanation does not exclude the multiple alternate and equally plausible explanations that do not require taking direct control of Umbra. Which is the crux of your moral quandary. Which means a reply along the lines of "the Tenno only give commands that Umbra willingly follows as part of an existing arrangement" is perfectly acceptable, since that explanation is no worse than any direct control hypothesis. And yet those replies render your moral issue moot.

5 minutes ago, Knowmad762 said:

Without getting too far into it, I don't see why these things have to be mutually exclusive. I will reserve my own judgement, but I believe many people would agree that it is immoral to keep an animal indoors if they wish to go out.

Then, considering this also includes farm enclosures, indoor pets, any sort of human-controlled housing for an animal, etc., there are a lot of contradictions occurring in those "many people".

[Knowmad762]

44 minutes ago, Tyreaus said:

Because your explanation does not exclude the multiple alternate and equally plausible explanations that do not require taking direct control of Umbra. Which is the crux of your moral quandary. Which means a reply along the lines of "the Tenno only give commands that Umbra willingly follows as part of an existing arrangement" is perfectly acceptable, since that explanation is no worse than any direct control hypothesis. And yet those replies render your moral issue moot.

Fair enough; I agree. If the official policy is "the Tenno only give commands that Umbra willingly follows as part of an existing arrangement", that certainly does render any moral issues moot. But if that is the official policy on the situation, that would make me a little sad for Umbra, as it essentially turns him into a robot: he just follows the Tenno around, never changing, never complaining, and nonreactive to the point of oblivious of what is going on around him. It seems like a wasted opportunity to make him into a real character in this world, with his own thought, desires and motivations.

I understand that there may be content in the future where Umbra shows some personality, but that is certainly not guaranteed. At the moment, it is illogical to the point of immersion breaking that a sentient human mind enters into a pseudo contract where they are down to do whatever, whenever the Tenno decides, unconditionally, in perpetuity. If Umbra acts, for all intents and purposes, like a robot, why not just make him a robot? What is the point of giving him humanity and sentience, if he never actually exercises that sentience in any discernible manner?