I agree with the discussion about this as it is – but I went down a different path. As far as we know, apes and chimps and pigs and fish and humans were all "created" from "whatever". As in, at the beginning of time, we did not create the apes or chimps or pigs. Humans are separate from pigs who are separate from apes who are separate.... The evolution or creation can be debated, but I don't think anyone believes that humans created pigs. Would our attitude be different if we had been the creators? At what point, especially when it concerns super-intelligent life, does the relationship with that entity become more like that of a parent and child? Where we look at it as something we created and a piece of us? Does it ever? Does it start like that (ie: We love our adorable, freaky little Siri) but change as the intelligence becomes less terribly adorable and more terribly intelligent? Is that line crossed when the intelligence is more intelligent than us? Suddenly, we are threatened because we aren't the smartest thing in the room? We do not have this parent-child attitude towards other humans, perhaps because we are on parallel ground (I had no involvement in the creation of the human child that was just born in China, or down the street for that matter) or perhaps because there is too much history and division between cultures and locales and races and classes. But, if we were to have a super intelligent life form that humankind created, would we look at it as us vs them, like we look at those evil terrorists over there and they look at the evil Americans over here, or would we look at it with the love or admiration or whatever that we have for a child? Like, this is our collective baby that we created and brought into this world? Furthermore, would the American's super-intelligent life form be loved by Americans but despised by China? Or vise versa? Would the intelligences have their own race or class or cultural divisions with each other? I doubt we will ever refer to this life form as "us" or "we" because we are still separate entities. But I am not so quick to assume we will look at it in the same way we look at a chimp, or a pig, or a fish. But then, we also feel solidarity with progeny: Should we feel less solidarity with a human that is less intelligent than a chimpanzee, than we do with the more intelligent ape?
ould our attitude be different if we had been the creators? At what point, especially when it concerns super-intelligent life, does the relationship with that entity become more like that of a parent and child?
this is an interesting point to consider. There is some presidence, to an extent. We pretty much created the domestic canine. Dogs were forged to our liking over hundreds of years. We certainly feel a kinship with them as a species that is seemingly unique and definitely parental. But then, people like humanodon still eat them, despite us being their creators. Also, dogs don't look like us. Would we be less likely to eat dogs if they did? Would we be less likely to mistreat a robot if it looked more human? I think so.
Well, there exist/have existed cultures that practice cannibalism. Relationships are often rooted in biology and are also very much shaped by culture. What would a super-intelligent culture be like? More pragmatic? Less emotive? More brutal? Who knows . . .