Not long after I began studying artificial intelligence, I came across an intriguing newspaper article.

“Development of Robots that Respond to Pain: Research Presented at IEEE ICRA 2016 by Leipzig University, Germany”

What interested me about this article was that while all lifeforms, including suffering humans (Homo Patiens), are essentially engaged in escaping pain, the focus of these researchers was on developing ‘suffering robots’. 

The article revealed that they aim to enable robots to respond to pain due to the protective function of pain, which is “to shield oneself from external environments” (Johannes Kuehn).

It’s like how a living being avoids fire to prevent burns, or how a person avoids wrongdoing due to the pain of conscience; similarly, robots must be able to respond to pain to “protect themselves” from harsh environments, self-diagnose, and achieve their “intended goals.” 

In essence, they aim to apply teleological pain perception, which states “…suffering for the sake of,” to develop more beneficial robots for humans.

What was significant to me was not so much the contradictions and limitations of this pain perception as the intentionality of ‘internalizing pain’ within the robot system “for the purpose of human developers.” 

While the derived purpose, “to protect the robot itself,” is ultimately subordinate to the fundamental purpose of “fulfilling its intended function and purpose,” once development is complete, the derived purpose inevitably precedes the fundamental one, both temporally and conditionally.

Thus, the very existence of suffering robots reveals an inherent contradiction. 

Especially since the fundamental purpose given to the robot is not its own purpose but that of some other—the human creator—making it seem as if it’s the robot’s own purpose, and the derived purpose, prioritizing its own protection, is essentially blind without the fundamental purpose.

Therefore, the motif of an “AI rebellion” that has been appearing in popular culture for decades, and more frequently in recent years, originates from such inherent contradictions of ‘suffering robots.‘

Despite this, research on suffering robots is just beginning. 

As the previous newspaper article mentioned, technologies like the ‘BioTac tactile fingertip sensor’ that can measure pressure and temperature autonomously and the ‘nervous robot-tissue model,’ inspired by human skin tissues, are progressing well. 

These systems send information to a ‘pain controller’ when stimulation exceeds a threshold, prompting an immediate response.

This interest seems to have accelerated in recent years in the field of ‘artificial skin.’ 

The headline of a 2019 article from Donga Science, “Evolution of ‘Artificial Skin’—Will Robots Feel Pain?”, is a step further from the 2016 headline of “Developing Robots that Respond to Pain.“

“The emergence of robots that ‘feel pain’ like humans,” reported in 2020, is based on a paper published in the international journal ‘Nature Communications’ by a research team from Nanyang Technological University (NTU) in Singapore. 

They introduced a ‘mini brain’ that could be implanted in robots, consisting of numerous microsensor nodes like human brain cells. The main purpose of this development, as stated by researcher Arindam Basu, was “to develop robots that can work like humans in harsh environments.“

Yet, I personally believe that this area of research is still in its early stages. Despite the sensational rhetoric of news articles, the complex issue of ‘pain,’ as experienced by living beings, especially humans, is still far from being resolved through the algorithmic calculations of artificial intelligence.

For instance, the ongoing issue of “through what medium” pain should be sensed and transmitted was highlighted last year in another article titled, “KIST Developed ‘Pain-Feeling Semiconductor’… Could it be Applied to Humanoids?“

This research team’s findings were featured on the cover of Advanced Science, focusing on mimicking human bio-signals rather than just neurons and synapses. They concentrated on understanding and implementing how the human body interprets and responds to external environmental changes using silver as a primary medium. Silver particles, depending on their amount, can adjust the intensity of bio-signals transmitted based on the degree of external stimuli, allowing for a response similar to how the human body adapts to pain.

I believe these recent articles indicate that research into ‘suffering robots’ (Robot Patiens) is just beginning. And yet, the theme of ‘suffering robots’ and the inherent contradictions associated with the motif of ‘AI rebellion’ are already permeating the collective imagination accompanied by contemporary anxieties.

At this point, what we need to reflect on might indeed be our own ‘suffering’—the fate of the ‘suffering robot’ (Robot Patiens) created by the ‘suffering human’ (Homo Patiens) who has not found their ‘way’ seems all too apparent.

The deep understanding of humanity and life must precede any progress in the science and technology of our times. This is essential for our technological civilization to move in the right direction.