Poll: Would you own a servant (or "slave", for the dramatic)?

[happyninja42]

If the being is sentient, then no I wouldn't "own" one. If the being isn't sentient, but is simply a robot/android, designed as a servant droid, sure, it's not sentient, so it would be no different (in my opinion) than having one of those little robot floor cleaners, or any number of other automated devices we have to help us.

However, if the being is sentient, I wouldn't be against the idea of actually hiring them as a servant, just like I would a human. If they are voluntarily offering to do the job, and in exchange, get some agreed upon wage/payment method, then sure, why not?

It's not ownership in that case, and is simply a business arrangement.

Though it does sort of remind me of Feet of Clay by Terry Pratchett, where the Golems had to have a Master. Some people treated them well, others didn't. But eventually, they became their own Masters, and thus attained freedom. They still wanted to work though, as they were programmed to be productive and useful, so they just transitioned to being employees for people. They worked 24/7, and saved that money (they really didn't need it for much except the occasional repair materials), to buy other golems from their owners, and give them to themselves. It was an awesome book that directly discussed this very subject.

But no, if I was given the choice, I wouldn't elect to own another sentient being, simply to be my servant. Though if it was some scenario of "being owned by me would be WAY more preferable to their current situation" then yeah I probably would, and then just treat them like an individual.

 

[Chris Moses]

Given Paragon Fury suggested that the "servant" could be a machine, I would have no problems owning one. I am very much anti-rights for artificial... constructs let's call them. Giving machines feelings so that they suffer in their service is the ACTUAL cruelty, and a useless demonstration of human arrogance.

 

[bluerocker]

Spoiler: large reaction is large

Like some other posters in this thread pointed out, I am on the boat of that this question needs proper definition.

A servant implies someone who is paid (be it room and board, proper wages, etc) for services rendered; such as maintaining a house hold, cooking, cleaning, etc. I would not mind having a butler or a maid to do these tasks, as I'm sure a lot of people would; and had I the money, I would pay that butler/maid the proper wages/compensation and treat them with the proper respect a human being deserves.

A slave, however, is someone who is in servitude without pay or compensation and is often so against their will (among a slew of other things). Because of those things, even with the contrived situation of the OP (and I DID read some of DearS, it is hella creeptastic), I would still feel wrong about a potential slave.

So, because of this lack of definition, I don't think this poll is exactly well made and is rather clickbait-y.
*chokes on hook*

 

[happyninja42]

Isn't that even worse? you're keeping them locked up for no good reason aside from your own entertainment.

In what way do I lock them up? They've got their own door.

So basically, you give them free room, board, health and dental, and you get paid in voluntarily offered snuggles whenever they feel like it? You monster.

Sounds like a parent and child scenario to me. Assuming by "voluntarily offered snuggles" you mean hugging, and not nekked time.

 

[Leg End]

So none of you have pets?

I have a bunch of cats. I'm wondering who is supposed to be the slave here.

 

[Politrukk]

So none of you have pets?

I have a bunch of cats. I'm wondering who is supposed to be the slave here.

Ah you have them, you own them you say?

I love how people try to explain the keeping of a sentient beast away when it doesn't quite suit them.

 

[Leg End]

Ah you have them, you own them you say?

I love how people try to explain the keeping of a sentient beast away when it doesn't quite suit them.

I have a bunch of hairy freeloaders in my house eating my food and defiling rectangular sand toilets while pissing on my nice things and maiming me when they so desire, because scratching posts are beneath them.

Again, I really don't know who is the owner in this scenario.

 

[Politrukk]

Ah you have them, you own them you say?

I love how people try to explain the keeping of a sentient beast away when it doesn't quite suit them.

I have a bunch of hairy freeloaders in my house eating my food and defiling rectangular sand toilets while pissing on my nice things and maiming me when they so desire, because scratching posts are beneath them.

Again, I really don't know who is the owner in this scenario.

Did they come of their own initial volition?
Will you go looking if they don't come back?

 

[Leg End]

Did they come of their own initial volition?

Yes and no. Of those remaining, two of them we adopted under our wing and they decided to have kids, one we took in before they died freezing in a box, and a bunch of others came to our house and wouldn't leave as we started feeding them and some asshole was starting to have them all killed.

Will you go looking if they don't come back?

Yes because that means Coyotes have possibly eaten them. Then I have to go seek revengeance upon Coyotes with firearms and fire.

 

[happyninja42]

So none of you have pets?

I have a bunch of cats. I'm wondering who is supposed to be the slave here.

Ah you have them, you own them you say?

I love how people try to explain the keeping of a sentient beast away when it doesn't quite suit them.

Can you prove they are sentient? Because from what I've seen from most experts in the field, cats don't qualify as sentient.

 

[Leg End]

Can you prove they are sentient? Because from what I've seen from most experts in the field, cats don't qualify as sentient.

As someone who has lived with an assload of cats for the majority of my life, I would state they very much qualify as sentient. Even if they aren't, I can't stop loving these little bastards!

 

[Leg End]

I think it's more apt than a servant/master one certainly, unless the cats are running the show.

Cats are always running the show. If they aren't, you're in The Twilight Zone.

 

[happyninja42]

Can you prove they are sentient? Because from what I've seen from most experts in the field, cats don't qualify as sentient.

As someone who has lived with an assload of cats for the majority of my life, I would state they very much qualify as sentient. Even if they aren't, I can't stop loving these little bastards!

Oh I love cats too, and have 2 of them right now. But the issue was a poster was calling people in this thread hypocrites for "owning sentient creatures" while decrying the act of owning a sentient creature. Considering that by every actual scientific definition of sentient, I'm pretty sure cats don't qualify, it makes his holier than thou stance fairly moot, and contrary to the actual discussion.

Loving the cats is another issue entirely, and has no bearing on whether or not they are sentient.

 

[Leg End]

To be fair, I don't have a cat, but almost all of my friends do. I'm a dog person myself, and in that relationship there is at least a dominance element that's hard to deny. It's also one that dogs need, and live with in their natural state as well. Then again, I don't expect that any of this matters to mister edgy.

I think I'd describe it as, most of the time a dog is more like your silly bro best friend while a cat acts more like a jealous girlfriend. For cats, getting to that special point where it's a mutual loving friendship is hard but it is beautiful. Dogs are all loving.

Oh I love cats too, and have 2 of them right now. But the issue was a poster was calling people in this thread hypocrites for "owning sentient creatures" while decrying the act of owning a sentient creature. Considering that by every actual scientific definition of sentient, I'm pretty sure cats don't qualify, it makes his holier than thou stance fairly moot, and contrary to the actual discussion.

I think he's trying to liken it to just owning a living being in general. I can see the point, but clearly he does not have pets under his wing.

Loving the cats is another issue entirely, and has no bearing on whether or not they are sentient.

I seriously think they're sentient in some way. After having one who really was a total best friend in my life I'd entirely say he was sentient, or at least borderline.

Cats are maagiiiic.

 

[Qizx]

Servant Yes, if I could afford one. However I would imagine a servant being someone like a butler. It is their job and they are doing it, and getting compensated well for it. They could quit any time they wanted, they could take vacation, and have every right I do as an equal.

Slave? Not in a million years.

 

[Dirkie]

A slave not as such, but someone who I can get into a mutual agreement to provide me with proper cooking, a clean home and that gets proper housing, and that I can provide with decent housing, companionship and a certain level of rights and protection, then mightbe.
But considering my personal problems, even the probably non-sentient vacuum cleaner* is a problem here, and it gets proper treatment.

*breaking noise regulations like an indoor jet engine when plugged in.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

If you were to program a sentient artificial person, but then programmed them in such a way that they wanted to be owned and actively disliked not being so, have you truly created sentience, or are you fooling yourself into beliving you're god?

Sentience is nothing without free will, and as I believe in that concept, I also believe any nation or people who create the so-called "willing" slaves get what's coming to them when events go predictable.

*Side note: As human beings aren't "created" in such a fashion as other beings they live with has control over their thought process, any sane a legally able to consent person can be as submissive as they choose. Because they are truly choosing. It's not my thing, but as long as it's safe, sane, and consensual, it's no business of mine.