Consent is an Indispensable Human Right

By Emma Oneto

The Star Trek: The Next Generation episode “Measure of a Man” questions whether Data, an advanced form of AI, has the right to choose his fate or whether Star Trek owns him as property. The Starfleet members at Data’s trial debate whether or not he counts as a sentient being. The scientist, Commander Maddox, defines sentience as intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness. Commander Maddox could not concretely prove Data’s state of being as sentient or non-sentient. As a result, the judge, Phillipa, rules to give Data the right to choose his fate. I felt surprised by her ruling because when faced with controversial issues, most companies or organizations act in the manner that most benefits them. Phillipa, on the other hand, chose to take the safer route. Rather than potentially allowing the violation of a living being’s rights, she ruled in favor of Data’s rights, even though his status as a living being remains unclear. I think most companies or governments today try to get away with as much as they can and ask for forgiveness later. This completely contrasts the treatment of AI in Westworld, where the creators of the park start to see signs of consciousness in the hosts, but they continue to submit them to situations of extreme suffering so they can continue profiting off the guests. Instead of making sure that the hosts do not become conscious, one creator actually encourages Dolores to explore her newfound feelings to satisfy his own curiosity and, perhaps, prove the technology for creating artificial life. Instead of playing it safe, the employees of Westworld seemingly try to ignore the ethical implications of their actions. I also felt impressed by her admission that she does not feel qualified to make such a ruling. She says that philosophers would find a better answer to their question. Again, this goes against typical behavior where company CEOs, for example, faced with ethical questions simply make their own decisions, thinking themselves qualified, rather than seeking the counsel of experts in this field.

Star Trek also explicitly connects Data’s trial to the issue of slavery, where the law considered humans, clearly sentient beings, as property. Before the trial, Phillipa says that Star Trek regulation considers Data property, so he cannot resign. As Phillipa’s statement brings up and history has shown, people can write unethical laws or interpret them incorrectly. We should evaluate the ethical implications of laws and not blindly consider them morally correct. Data’s situation also connects to historical instances of nonconsensual use of human subjects in research. This episode of Star Trek argues that by not obtaining consent, you indirectly claim that person as your property. Thinking back to Harvest which also dealt with the idea of consent, I think Virgil did view the Prakash family as his property, so he and the Guardians forced the family into consent without negotiation. These pieces of science fiction support the importance of obtaining true consent as an indispensable human right.