The Morality and Philosophy of the Sibyl System

[MarkS00N]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

If a system's recommendations are followed 98% or more of the time, are they still "mere" recommendations? Admittedly, that 98% figure is a hypothetical one, but this narrative is (so far) giving every implication that people typically follow Sibyl's "recommendations".

I think that you, and some others, are downplaying the influence that Sibyl holds over the world of Psycho-Pass.

Yes, it is a mere recommendation...
People don't follow it because the dominator doesn't give them choice, but because they decide to trust dominator recommendation...

I don't downplay Sibyl influence in world of Psycho-Pass, I know how severe it's influence is society (such as hue as the new beauty standard)...
What I don't agree is your statement that the human is forced by Sibyl...

Several different choices? No, just two: Shoot to kill, or don't shoot at all. Those are the only choices that Dominator-users seem to have if the gun shifts to lethal mode.

In any event, your speedometer/Dominator analogy is not a good one for the simple reason that a speedometer doesn't strictly limit choices like this.

What choice does a person has with speedometer except keep the speed at red bar or slow down the speed to below the red bar? But this is the last time I will argue about the speedometer...

I see dominator as tool so I treat it as tool: To use it or to not use it. What other option do you have when you use a tool?
Also, there are no pressure directly from dominator itself, allow the human to choose...

As for the whole "POOL with oil and lighter and such condition", you're missing my point there. My point is that Paralyzing shot is probably just as effective a means as negating that situational threat as Lethal shot is.

The person who was raped, her psychological state changed, and that is why her Crime Coefficient went up, in my opinion. Not because (or at least not just because) of the whole pool of oil situation.

You are the one that miss my point...
Dominator only see the Target's Threat at that point and change accordingly...
While the CC went up to 110, it only activate the Paralyzer Mode as Masaoka and Akane shown...

Yeah, but most good marskmen using a normal hand-gun are usually able to shoot to subdue but not kill (shooting someone in the leg, for example, can do this if it's a good shot).

A good enforcer can calm the target and remove the threat the target may possess, thus re-activate the paralyzer mode just like Akane did in episode 1.
Much more 'humane' than shooting leg and crippling the target...

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by MarkS00N

Yes, it is a mere recommendation...
People don't follow it because the dominator doesn't give them choice, but because they decide to trust dominator recommendation...

Here's something that I just thought of that I would encourage you, and other people reading this thread, to consider.

The Enforcers are treated as dogs, correct? That's how they're portrayed, as "hunting dogs".

Now, does a dog-owner give his dog recommendations, or does he give his dog commands?

What I don't agree is your statement that the human is forced by Sibyl...

That's not my statement. But Sibyl does take options away.

I see dominator as tool so I treat it as tool: To use it or to not use it. What other option do you have when you use a tool?

How many tools automatically change their own setting? Without allowing any manual override? And then give you spoken instructions on what you should do with it?

Is the Dominator the toll of the Enforcer, or is the Enforcer the toll of the Dominator? Maybe the gun's very name itself is a not-so-subtle hint from Gen...

A good enforcer can calm the target and remove the threat the target may possess, thus re-activate the paralyzer mode just like Akane did in episode 1.

You write this as though what Akane did in Episode 1 was standard operating procedures.

But Akane's actions in Episode 1 clearly aren't standard operating procedures, or she never would have been questioned on them the way she was by Ginoza.

[Terizent]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

You write this as though what Akane did in Episode 1 was standard operating procedures.

But Akane's actions in Episode 1 clearly aren't standard operating procedures, or she never would have been questioned on them the way she was by Ginoza.

True, but she didn't obey standard operating procedures starting from when she stopped Masaoka from Paralyzing the victim. If she had, then Shinya would not have been shot as well. Ginoza clearly does not give a shit about the victim, it seems that he was more angry with Akane about her shooting one of the hounds and not just Paralyzing her straight away. It's Ginoza who's questioning her here, not the Sibyl system.

[MarkS00N]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Here's something that I just thought of that I would encourage you, and other people reading this thread, to consider.

The Enforcers are treated as dogs, correct? That's how they're portrayed, as "hunting dogs".

Now, does a dog-owner give his dog recommendations, or does he give his dog commands?

Very nice of you to remember that...
Now do you remember what the inspector called? Handler.
So who handle the dog? The handler or the dominator?
Who gives commands and what gives recommendation?

That's not my statement. But Sibyl does take options away.

So?
It is a problem for you but acceptable to me as long as Sibyl doesn't pressure (thus forced) the user.

How many tools automatically change their own setting? Without allowing any manual override? And then give you spoken instructions on what you should do with it?

Is the Dominator the toll of the Enforcer, or is the Enforcer the toll of the Dominator? Maybe the gun's very name itself is a not-so-subtle hint from Gen...

So?
You've been clear that your problem is dominator take some choice from you and you won't take my argument that even if dominator take some choice, it isn't a problem because there are still several other choices...

What I've seen so far from dominator is merely the order of police's procedure:
1) Investigate whether the person is indeed the suspect (scan the target)
2) Apprehend the suspect (What Masaoka did is episode 2)
From here, dominator take over
3) Gives warning shot (Paralyzer)
4) Shoot the limb or tase (Paralyzer)
If the target project danger to police
5) Shoot to death (head or chest) (Lethal Eliminator)

Unless your police don't have these procedure, I can't see dominator become such a problem because what it does is actually normal.

You write this as though what Akane did in Episode 1 was standard operating procedures.

But Akane's actions in Episode 1 clearly aren't standard operating procedures, or she never would have been questioned on them the way she was by Ginoza.

Here is the list of non-standard procedure Akane has done:
a) She prevent Masaoka shoot the paralyzer, thus
b) Alllow the woman's Target's Threat increased, which
c) Trigger the Lethal Eliminator due to her endanger Kogami, yet
d) She shot Kogami who fell on the pool of oil while the woman still have the lighter

If Kogami dead because the Lethal Eliminator shot to the woman, it will be Kogami's fault. But Akane's shot that paralyze Kogami can be seen as endanger Kogami even more, due Dominator's Target's Threat Judgement on the woman.

In my opinion, the reason Ginzo ask Kogami after Akane's explanation is because Kogami pretty much one of the factor in the incident...

At least that is my interpretation...

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Arya

Spoiler for the little parable of Arya and the SATNAV:

Here a little and probably stupid example of what I mean. Let's talk about SATNAV. Before its coming I was quite good in remembering a route I drove once. And that was not a matter of excellent memory, but more a matter of identifying the right landmarks thank to which the next time I would be able to not losing myself. Then that evil device came!! Wow, cool. It even speaks and gives me directions. Its first aim clearly is giving directions and drives you wherever you have to go. But the side effect has been, at least to me, that I stopped caring about the route, so every time SATNAV drives me in a wrong place, rarely but it happens, the result is: first that I'm in the wrong place, and second that gradually I have lost my confidence in my personal ability in "resolving" the situation because I stopped caring about that, I'm not used to it, not anymore. So the first thing I do now is turning up the google app of my phone, ie I entrust myself to another SATNAV and not to myself Do you see how sad this story is???
That f***g bastard is lucky that it fails not often enough to make me throw it out of the window.

Here the moral. May I say that the SATNAV is evil? No. May I say that Arya is evil? Neither. But I can say that deep down Arya has lost something in the process. And if now Arya is dumber than before surely it's not a big deal, but what if this kind of process would apply to something different, something more deeper than going home? Like judging people. Today we would say, the Sibyl system is cool but I can judge people by myself. Tomorrow we would say, f**k I chose the wrong person last time, let's Sybil do it for us. And the day after? (pun half intended).

Heh, that's a cute yet relevant analogy, though I'd add that it's hard to accuse your SATNAV of being evil, unless it specifically ordered you to plough through a line of kids crossing the road in the middle of a school zone.

I think most of us generally agree on the point that something went wrong somewhere in this alternative reality, and that it quite possibly started the same way you suggested: a cool new technology came along that was so useful, that made so many people's lives so much easier, which took away the anxiety and guesswork in deciding the careers that one is most suited for, that people began to rely too much on the system, thus creating a new set of problems to replace the ones that were eliminated.

It's a scenario that is very easy to relate to, because we can think of so many examples in our everyday lives. Your SATNAV system alone is a great example. This is the key reason I find the argument that the Sibyl System is inherently bad to be unconvincing. It's not so much the system that is at fault, but the habitual reliance on the system that is the root problem.

Going along with that line of reasoning, I've wondered if the reason for Akane's perfect hue despite the considerable stress and trauma she has experienced is the result of her attitude towards the Sibyl System. Unlike her peers who seem only too ready to push all decision-making — and subsequently all direct responsibility — to the system, Akane consciously thinks about her choices and strives to take active responsibility for the consequences of her decisions.

I'm sure most of us are familiar with people around us who constantly moan about how they suffer because of the system, refusing instead to take a hard look at themselves, at their own failings that led them to their present problems. Instead of thinking actively about what they need to do to dig themselves out of their hole, they waste time saying that there's no point in doing anything because the system will work against them anyway. In effect, they dig a deeper grave for themselves through their procrastination.

In other words, what I'm saying is that, in reality, many people are miserable because they wait for others to solve problems they should instead resolve on their own. There's a high chance that a similar situation exists in the Psycho-Pass universe. It's a matter of changing one's perspective to life. Faced with constraints, does one say, why bother doing anything, because the system won't let me do what I really want. Or does one instead think of making lemonade from lemons? I suspect that Akane is psychologically resilient because she consciously makes the best of whatever she is given, at a time when everyone else wishes for more incentives before they bother lifting a finger to work.

Does one deserve more without working hard to earn the reward?

[Anh_Minh]

Well, Akane's been given a lot by the system. Starting with choices. It's not everyone who has them.

And you'd think people who can cruise into an ok life and never think about anything they don't want to think about (because Sibyl does it for them) would be the least stressed.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Well, Akane's been given a lot by the system. Starting with choices. It's not everyone who has them.

That's an open question we don't yet have definitive answers for. We don't actually know if Akane was given a lot by the system, or whether she earned what she received. I'm willing to bet that she earned her rewards, based on what we've seen of her over three episodes. She's clearly not a passive individual, although whether that is a product of youthful idealism or an inherent personality trait remains to be seen.

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

And you'd think people who can cruise into an ok life and never think about anything they don't want to think about (because Sibyl does it for them) would be the least stressed.

This apparent paradox was addressed in Ep2, the curious situation where, despite having the luxury of choice, Akane did not seem happier or more assured than her peers. Now, the interesting thing to ask is if it doesn't really matter whether or not one actually has a choice, why should people be bitter about the apparent lack of it?

I mean, if you're born in Rwanda in a time of genocide, what choice do you have but to make the best of what you have? Moaning about your lack of realistic choices isn't going to solve your life-or-death problems.

[Dengar]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

For all we know, employers may have little-to-no say in the matter.

WHERE is this implied? Seriously WHERE? Give me an exact quote where this is implied.

Then there's of course the fact that for some odd reason you chose to completely ignore the second half of my post. >_>




Re: Akane had choices VS normal people don't. It's the same in real life. Only the BEST get to choose their jobs. Those who suck are supposed settle for what they CAN get. This is reality. Some people become presidents, others become video store clerks.


I'm also getting tired of hearing this BS about recommendations taking the choice away. That's utter and complete BS. It's suddenly the system's fault because people CHOOSE to go with what the system says? That's like saying guns are at fault for making people CHOOSE to use them to shoot people. It must be nice, living a life where you can absolve yourself from all responsibility, saying crap like "X made me do it, I didn't have a choice". Don't give me that crap, you ALWAYS have a choice.


I'm sorry for getting a bit heated here, but the mere notion of escaping responsibility gets my blood boiling fast.

[ttdestroy]

Originally Posted by Dengar

WHERE is this implied? Seriously WHERE? Give me an exact quote where this is implied.

Then there's of course the fact that for some odd reason you chose to completely ignore the second half of my post. >_>




Re: Akane had choices VS normal people don't. It's the same in real life. Only the BEST get to choose their jobs. Those who suck are supposed settle for what they CAN get. This is reality. Some people become presidents, others become video store clerks.


I'm also getting tired of hearing this BS about recommendations taking the choice away. That's utter and complete BS. It's suddenly the system's fault because people CHOOSE to go with what the system says? That's like saying guns are at fault for making people CHOOSE to use them to shoot people. It must be nice, living a life where you can absolve yourself from all responsibility, saying crap like "X made me do it, I didn't have a choice". Don't give me that crap, you ALWAYS have a choice.


I'm sorry for getting a bit heated here, but the mere notion of escaping responsibility gets my blood boiling fast.

I agree though the Dominator will remove the choice of paralyzer after it passes a certain limit, it does not pull the trigger. Whoever uses the Dominator still has an option: to not use it at all.

[Quadratic]

Guys! GUYS! A pool of gasoline doesn't explode. It just burns, and the rape victim and Shinya would painfully burn. You guys are influenced too much by action films...

Originally Posted by Triple_R

But the problem with these opportunities for mental health is that there's nothing discreet about them.

Recall how the criminal from the 1st episode felt that his reputation had been ruined simply from getting a bad reading. So whatever "therapy" entails in this world, it doesn't seem to be something you can enter into discreetly in this world (unlike seeing a mental health professional in the real world, which often can be done discreetly).

If the criminal in the first episode felt he could undergo this therapy without it destroying his reputation, maybe he would have done so. But alas, this option does not appear to be there.

Large scale management thinking: What's the percentage of people who will volunteeringly visit a mental health professional, especially those who really need to seek help? Hopefully someone will come in and provide some statistics, but even without numbers, I'm willing to bet the percentage is extremely low.
In fact, I would say our social culture pressures us to "keep our s*** under wraps" to the point where people fear seeking help because they think people will brand them as weak.
Heck, in my country there's a legendary rugby player who did an advertisement on admitting he had mental depression, expressed that it's ok to feel depressed, one shouldn't fear asking for help from friends, family and professional people. Sounds like it's time for social change.

Quote-unquote therapy only applies to latent criminals. At this point in time, there's still much speculation on what actually defines a latent criminal. Of the ones we've seen that has committed serious crimes are the rapist and the hacker, and the rape victim who was on the verge of killing herself and Shinya.
Normal therapy seems fine, as we see the rape victim isn't shown being tortured, sitting opposite to a doctor who's reading her medical data.

As for the rapist (Geez, notice how we don't even use his name? How cruel are we?!), I'm speculating (obviously):
1) The girls in ep 2 casually talked about the whole mental health subject to each other, so I don't think going to therapy is reputation breaking.

2)

"Why would he avoid treatment long enough for his Hue to get this cloudy?"
"It's also possible that he used incompatible drugs."

There were drugs on the table, one was a red-white capsule. The same pill was seen outside with 3 shady guys (10:43 if you care).
Maybe medical science hasn't advanced as far as it should, maybe he decided to mix drugs, making things worst for himself, prior to getting flagged and let loose. I doubt we'll ever know what his real situation actually pushed him to get flagged in the first place, but obviously the social pressure of being branded a latent criminal made him go the whole way.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I think it was designed to make a better society, but my sense is that it was designed with a very "top-down" mentality behind it.

What I mean by that is that I can definitely see how "the 1%" would love Sibyl: It minimizes the chances of getting problematic employees, it is likely good for productivity, it keeps the masses under very tight control.

It was probably "sold" to the masses as a better way to fight crime, and also as a means to make people "happier" by finding psychological problems and correcting them.

But what it's actually done to Joe and Jane Average is take an awful lot of choice and self-empowerment away from them, leaving them with very little flexibility within the system itself. That's the impression I'm getting so far, anyway.

It's obviously a top-down mentality, because that's how large populations operate. It's a scaling problem.
Sibyl fails for small populations (eg. like your rural area) because there are chances no one is meets the requirement on some standard, so you heavily rely on each other, for better or worst.
Applying rural-style rules fails as a population grows. Same skill sets are common. As they say, "Too many cooks spoil the broth", and productivity drops or not as good as it should be. It's a chaotic mess.

What you sacrifice (choice, self-empowerment) is supposed to be gained in efficiency and productivity. Of course, this only works properly if there is a clear intent in what you're trying to produce.
The fact that we don't understand the "meaning of life" means we're slaving away for no reason and "scaling up" actually serves zero purpose. This is a real life issue that is apparent regardless of Sibyl or not (Yes, I'm aware how pessimistic that sounds).

Originally Posted by Triple_R

The internet is actually the opposite problem as Sibyl. The internet is a wild frontier that governments haven't found the ideal way to regulate yet. It's wild frontier nature is much of what makes the internet so much fun, but it's also what empowers cyber-bullying. Finding a way to keep the baby while throwing out the bath-water is the elusive trick that governments are still struggling with.

It's actually a similar problem, assuming Sibyl started off with nice intent.
The internet started based on a system of trust. Clearly, we weren't trustworthy which is why it's turned into a wild frontier that it is today.
It's clear society wasn't trustworthy with the data Sibyl calculated, which is why there are arguments about things like infringing privacy and the latent criminal reputation.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Well, sure, but it's not like latent criminals are the only people that could do this job.

Ginoza says they're short on manpower.
Speculation is whether he meant at that time or all the time. Considering Akane was the only one out of 500 people, I'm banking on the latter.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Any particular quote or scene leading you to believe this?

I'm afraid you're going to need to quote or show a scene that says otherwise.
As I responded earlier to Anh_Minh:

Originally Posted by Quadratic

I'm aware Sibyl assigns some job aptitude ranking to everyone, but one of the friend mentions Akane was "an honor student who scored 700 points on the last exam.". Is this an old school style exam, or the actual value that Sibyl assigned? I'm under the impression it's the former for some reason, and is different to the Sibyl aptitude rank.
Akane also says her "job aptitude exceeded the Bureau's employment standards", so is it the factory's standards set too low that let him slip through the cracks?

Since I'm under the assumption Sibyl is a calculation type machine, it'll only give out numbers, and people have set guidelines the compare the numbers to.
Person A is a latent criminal. Person A has the job aptitude to work in CID.
Kagari given a choice of isolation or join CID. Speculation on my part that Sibyl gave out TWO "numbers" separately, and the people put the two together and that's his choice.

If you're going to counter argue that Sibyl's not a calculation type machine by using the Dominator as the example, it's obviously dependent on the numbers Sibyl gives out, but it in itself interprets how to change modes based on those numbers, which is why it locks itself if it cannot talk to Sibyl but still is able to authorize usage to Akane and company (ep 3).

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Here I go back to what I wrote in reply to TRL a few pages back - The author is choosing what to show us, and that has to be for a reason. If the author keeps showing us "the dark side of society", and never shows us much concrete reason to think "Hey, this fictional world isn't so bad after all", then that kind of suggests something, doesn't it?

We could be seeing Al Capones be brought to justice. Instead, we're seeing rape and bully victims be brought to justice...

Maybe Episode 4 will change that. But if we keep getting more of the same, that's rather suggestive of where the author is going with this story, imo...

It shows how society seems incapable of using Sibyl properly, how crimes persists in the face of Sibyl, and how the social culture is required to change to adapt to the new way of life.
Sybil may be "new" technology, but people haven't changed.
Misusing tools? Check.
Crime? Since the begining of time.
Adaptation? People smarten up and flourish or collapse under its own weight. Let's wait and see which way Psycho-pass wants to go with Sibyl in their lives.

Originally Posted by Triple_R

I should state here that I live in a very rural area. There may well not have been "a more serious crime" elsewhere. But, because I'm in a rural area, we also don't have the same degree of cameras at play.

I will also admit that the fact that I live in a very rural area does impact my thinking. For example, Dengar arguing that humans don't have empathy is just utterly absurd to me, just based on what I see within my community on a regular basis (ex. if a member of the community has a serious disease, there is inevitably a fundraiser for that individual). Perhaps in a more urban area people don't care about one another as much, but that's definitely not the case in small towns, at least in my experience.

He's just exaggerating, but as I explained above, it's a scaling population issue.
I think you will have an understanding on what the problems are with the "solutions" (there's no silver bullet, obviously), which is exactly why a lot of the cold comments make sense.

Spoiler for Off topic:

I think you guys need stop trying to on getting on each others throats, though I probably shouldn't be one to talk after my multiple stints in the SAO sub-forums...

In the end, I still think the people themselves hold a much larger responsibility than Sibyl.

"Well I'll be. An Oracle by the Sibyl System"
"The Dominators are Sibyl's eyes."
"As always, the Dominators kick ass when they get serious."
"That which needs to be done is carried out by those capable of doing it. Such is the grace bestowed upon mankind by Sibyl."
"What a blessing the Sibyl System is, huh?"

Here we see the people are either personifying Sibyl, or treating it as something with god-like powers.
That's completely irresponsible.
It falls on the level of "if I don't understand it, it must be magic". Crunching numbers is not some magical/higher level power.
Anyone who's done some sort of computer support to friends and family, will know exactly what that means.


Anyway, I think the whole argument has been drawn out long enough for me, because short of getting a transcript of all 3 episodes and analysing each scene shot by shot, the rest is all speculation.
In fact I'm surprised 3 episodes managed to drag out this much for and against arguments in the first place, since I thought there wouldn't be much arguments in favor of Sibyl in the first place so I humorously decided to defend Sibyl.

[Wild Goose]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

*snip*

As I've highlighted before, I don't think it's a coincidence that the Criminal Investigation Department's logo is adapted from the North American symbol for the medical profession. We are, in essence, being invited to ask: "What if an individual's potential for 'crime' can be detected in a way similar to how we diagnose disease?"

*snip*

That is an interesting perspective, and one that I hadn't considered. Then I went back, looked at their logo, and facepalmed at how I missed that.

When viewed in light of your POV - crime as a disease - the show starts to make a lot more sense.

Regards Sibyl, when viewed in the Crime as a Contagious Disease perspective, it then becomes a powerful and crucial tool to ensure that society is safe. I personally think that it has good uses, but as Masaoka pointed out, part of the problem young people have today is that they're not good on dealing with stress on their own because they're reliant on the system.

And then of course there's the usual cyberpunk genre convention where if something like Sibyl exists, sooner or later it's gonna end up tampered, sabotaged, or becomes self-aware and goes rampant.

[Cosmic Eagle]

It's....actually possible to scan a bot...O__o


Sibyl really does nothing but put stereotypes everywhere....Like black comedy land or something...seriously, that overseer.....stereotypical sociopathic boss.

That he's even in that post is more than sign enough that Sibyl has seriously gone wrong.

Anyway, does anyone have a list of the different color hue readings?

[Terizent]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

It's....actually possible to scan a bot...O__o

Anyway, does anyone have a list of the different color hue readings?

I'm sure that if Sibyl can essentially calculate a human's potential in both careers and criminality, then it will be more than adept enough at predicting and analyzing robots.

As for the Hue Scans, the colors do not matter. It's the lightness/darkness of the colors.

See this picture here:http://i48.tinypic.com/ngsuti.png
There are different colors for every person, but there is one identifiable pattern, the hues that become darker over time are judged to be too "stressed out," and transferred to another workplace. Also apparent is that all the other "mentally healthy" workers have bright/light colors-seafoam green, pale blue, pink, lilac, etc.

Akane's Psycho-Pass (which seems to be synonymous with the result of your hue scan) was described to be powder blue, another light color.

On the other hand, the rapist in episode one had forest green and his victim was steel blue. Note that these are both dark colors; the rapist specifically says that their PP's have "become muddy."

The "hue," aka the approximation of the scan's result to a more basic color (eg. steel blue -> blue, or magenta ->l red) does not really matter. It is the lightness/darkness of the hue itself that measures a person's level of stress.

I believe that the hue may actually be an indicator of personality types. Similar to the blood type personality tests that the Japanese are so fond of, but actually correct because Sibyl "calculates" the color using the person's brain scan data.

[TinyRedLeaf]

A new sub-forum. Oh noes/yays...

Don't know how difficult it would be, but it would be nice to pull the discussion on the morality and philosophy of the Sibyl System to a separate thread.

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

Doesn't the Sibyl work by calculating based on an organic brain?

Like this they should use it to detect and get rid of defective robot workers....wait, maybe they already do...

It's not far-fetched at all. You just need to recast your perspective of biology, and think of your brain as a complex computation machine. We don't think of our brains in that fashion today only because neuroscience is still very much in its infancy. But even so, we're already at a stage where brain scans can reliably predict how we would answer yes/no questions split seconds before we can even articulate an answer. It's on this basis, after all, that Sam Harris argues strongly that free will is an illusion, that what we perceive as a conscious decision made of our own free will is in fact nothing more than the result of a complex chemical reaction that can be scientifically measured, and hence predicted.

So, if a Dominator can scan a biological brain that is essentially a mass of electrical signals, it can easily do the same for a mechanical "brain". (Besides, who's to say that robotic brains are 100 per cent mechanical in the Psycho-Pass universe? It could be a cyborg brain for all we know.)

[karice67]

Finally! And I agree - this interesting discussion definitely deserves its own thread, even if it'll be a bit of work for the moderators to move all the posts over...

------

Speaking of which...just my two cents.

I feel that the main debate here atm is whether the Sibyl system is just a tool and thus faultless, with the flaws in the way it is used existing entirely because humans can never use such technology 'perfectly', vs. the idea that Sibyl itself is part of the problem.

I wonder if this debate is actually pointing to one of the deeper points about the world that the creators of this show are interested in, except not just with regards to the universe of Psycho-Pass, but also and more importantly with regards to the modern societies in which we, the viewers, live.

The apparent dichotomy that seems to have appeared in this thread is, in my opinion, pointing to questions at another level - which some might term the 'meta' level - about why we have reacted in particular ways to what has been presented to us thus far. This has been illustrated in what some of you have been posting about the system, though I'll draw on one of TinyRedLeaf's recent comments in particular.

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

We keep coming back to this point. I agree, of course, that it's an important principle — in real life — but to keep harping on this is to miss the entire premise of the show.

As I've highlighted before, I don't think it's a coincidence that the Criminal Investigation Department's logo is adapted from the North American symbol for the medical profession. We are, in essence, being invited to ask: "What if an individual's potential for 'crime' can be detected in a way similar to how we diagnose disease?"

We're being asked to put aside our disbelief and to imagine an ethical system built on that premise. The premise is, at heart, quite simple and is, in fact, not very far removed from some of the ideas proposed by contemporary scientists as renowned as Samuel Harris and Richard Dawkins: that it makes no sense to have a justice system that punishes criminal behaviour after the fact if science could show that a defendant was psychologically incapable of distinguishing right from wrong the way healthy individuals can.

Monsters do exist. Serial killers are, for example, wired very differently from normal people and they can't help but kill.

And to take the premise one step further, if you could in fact diagnose criminal potential — and in this alternative reality, the underlying assumption is that it can be measured very accurately — would it be morally responsible to let the individual roam free when appropriate treatment is readily available?

*snip*

My arguments in support for the Sibyl System come from this angle. It's easy to dismiss dystopian fiction as something that could never happen in real life. It's much more fun, on the other hand, to imagine how it could have come to pass.

Personally, I'm probably leaning towards seeing the Sibyl system and the institutions built around it, particularly the judgement of people's mental health, as something I don't want to support. To me, there's something sinister about the way that mental health has been criminalised...or perhaps, the way to see it is that crime has been medicalised, and that there are many problems inherent in the system because that. In other words, I'm inclined to see the world of PSYCHO-PASS as a dystopia that can only fall apart, sooner or later.

However, I wonder if the more important question to ask is: why do I think that way? Why is this my instinctive reaction? Why do I expect failure? Why do some of us automatically recoil at the thought of a social system that places so much faith in a scientific diagnostic tool?

Or, to be more specific, what are the institutionalised beliefs about freedom and choice, about the relationship between science and human nature, that inform my reaction, and most importantly, where have they come from?

The reason I think these questions are important is because we ourselves often lose sight of the factors that influence the way we think. Which is where the debates in this thread come in again. I think it's been pointed out a lot earlier in this thread: the Sibyl system is like many systems in the modern world, systems that set limits on what we can do in various aspects of life. However, we don't really perceive these systems anymore - they've become so much a part of our lives that we don't question how they've been formed, or whether they actually make sense. Just like many of the characters in PSYCHO-PASS don't question how ubiquitous Sibyl is in their lives.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by karice67

However, I wonder if the more important question to ask is: why do I think that way? Why is this my instinctive reaction? Why do I expect failure? Why do some of us automatically recoil at the thought of a social system that places so much faith in a scientific diagnostic tool?

Or, to be more specific, what are the institutionalised beliefs about freedom and choice, about the relationship between science and human nature, that inform my reaction, and most importantly, where have they come from?

The reason I think these questions are important is because we ourselves often lose sight of the factors that influence the way we think. Which is where the debates in this thread come in again. I think it's been pointed out a lot earlier in this thread: the Sibyl system is like many systems in the modern world, systems that set limits on what we can do in various aspects of life. However, we don't really perceive these systems anymore - they've become so much a part of our lives that we don't question how they've been formed, or whether they actually make sense. Just like many of the characters in PSYCHO-PASS don't question how ubiquitous Sibyl is in their lives.

Precisely!

It's the fundamental basis of all philosophy, the need to always consider the assumptions, both implicit and explicit, that lead us to the conclusions we make. To always confront our own biases before we criticise those of others.

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Precisely!

It's the fundamental basis of all philosophy, the need to always consider the assumptions, both implicit and explicit, that lead us to the conclusions we make. To always confront our own biases before we criticise those of others.

This is actually the reason why the current discussion on the Sibyl System's approach on justice and incarceration actually somewhat reminds me of Foucault's Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison in the way it attempts to tackle the the social and cultural trends that lead society to adopt current methods of incarceration and/or reformation. That is to say, the question for me becomes to ask whether the Sibyl System is itself a tool for reforming would-be criminals, or a tool of vengeful control over anyone with a potential to disrupt the status quo.

I actually had a write-up somewhere when I started to see how the Urobucher's take on this society's overarching philosophy on crime and punishment somewhat mirror's Foucault's observation that the model of punishment is used not only for crime but also for controlling an entire society not only through it's criminal codes but also in everyday life.

The Sibyl System in fact nearly epitomizes Foucault's observation of the three primary techniques for control: hierarchial observation, examination and normalized judgement. The Sibyl System is the 21st century (?) equivalent of the metaphorical Panopticon. A prison of computer code and algorithms.

If I find it and finish it I'll probably post it some other time.

[Cosmic Eagle]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

A new sub-forum. Oh noes/yays...

Don't know how difficult it would be, but it would be nice to pull the discussion on the morality and philosophy of the Sibyl System to a separate thread.


It's not far-fetched at all. You just need to recast your perspective of biology, and think of your brain as a complex computation machine. We don't think of our brains in that fashion today only because neuroscience is still very much in its infancy. But even so, we're already at a stage where brain scans can reliably predict how we would answer yes/no questions split seconds before we can even articulate an answer. It's on this basis, after all, that Sam Harris argues strongly that free will is an illusion, that what we perceive as a conscious decision made of our own free will is in fact nothing more than the result of a complex chemical reaction that can be scientifically measured, and hence predicted.

So, if a Dominator can scan a biological brain that is essentially a mass of electrical signals, it can easily do the same for a mechanical "brain". (Besides, who's to say that robotic brains are 100 per cent mechanical in the Psycho-Pass universe? It could be a cyborg brain for all we know.)

No, I mean detecting the threat from a bot that's been programmed to kill is easy as heck....detecting latent flaws in the bot's programming OTOH...is about as meaningful as scanning a rock unless the bot is sentient.

Also how does free will being a process of our own brains make it an illusion? It's still our self that produces and is comprised of said chemical reactions that differs from person to person resulting in varied responses.

If it weren't even for said reactions the physical brain would not function.

It's a web of pathways said reactions can take but which pathway it takes is still a response to a host of various factors. A psychopath for example, has far less choice due to his wiring than a normal person. A normal person has far more possibility and potential perhaps.

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

Precisely!

It's the fundamental basis of all philosophy, the need to always consider the assumptions, both implicit and explicit, that lead us to the conclusions we make. To always confront our own biases before we criticise those of others.

Originally Posted by karice67

However, I wonder if the more important question to ask is: why do I think that way? Why is this my instinctive reaction? Why do I expect failure? Why do some of us automatically recoil at the thought of a social system that places so much faith in a scientific diagnostic tool?

Or, to be more specific, what are the institutionalised beliefs about freedom and choice, about the relationship between science and human nature, that inform my reaction, and most importantly, where have they come from?

The reason I think these questions are important is because we ourselves often lose sight of the factors that influence the way we think. Which is where the debates in this thread come in again. I think it's been pointed out a lot earlier in this thread: the Sibyl system is like many systems in the modern world, systems that set limits on what we can do in various aspects of life. However, we don't really perceive these systems anymore - they've become so much a part of our lives that we don't question how they've been formed, or whether they actually make sense. Just like many of the characters in PSYCHO-PASS don't question how ubiquitous Sibyl is in their lives.

Yet don't you already inwardly recoil at our current society? The way how there's a "greater good at the expense of what may be morally right" governing the greater core of it. Doesn't everyone recoil somewhat against it but just bear with it due to lack of ability to do anything about it?

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by MeoTwister5

This is actually the reason why the current discussion on the Sibyl System's approach on justice and incarceration actually somewhat reminds me of Foucault's Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison in the way it attempts to tackle the the social and cultural trends that lead society to adopt current methods of incarceration and/or reformation. That is to say, the question for me becomes to ask whether the Sibyl System is itself a tool for reforming would-be criminals, or a tool of vengeful control over anyone with a potential to disrupt the status quo.

Both. If it deems you irreparable (which can happen without you doing anything bad), then Sibyl's the excuse to throw you away or push the worst jobs onto you while severely limiting the rewards you can get.

If not, but something happens to you - instead of letting you spiral down into depression and self-destructive behaviors, the way it happens in our societies, Sibyl will force you to heal. (Or be relegated to the category I discussed in the previous paragraph...)

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

No, I mean detecting the threat from a bot that's been programmed to kill is easy as heck....detecting latent flaws in the bot's programming OTOH...is about as meaningful as scanning a rock unless the bot is sentient.

You've missed the point. It's not that the bot is sentient, but rather that in the Psycho-Pass universe, humans are essentially treated like biological machines. This alternative society has adopted a very mechanistic, highly deterministic view of human behaviour. That is, it appears to believe that your every behaviour can be reduced to a set of chemical reactions that can be detected in advance, and thus prevented with the right pills, if so desired.

This society apparently believes that sentience is an illusion. If that seems mind-boggling to you, consider for a moment the full implications of the Turing Test, that classic test of whether a machine has become sentient.

The Turing Test is a test of a machine's ability to exhibit intelligent behaviour equivalent to or indistinguishable from that of an actual human. In the original illustrative example, a human judge engages in a natural language conversation with a human and a machine designed to generate performance indistinguishable from that of a human being. All participants are separated from one another. If the judge cannot reliably tell the machine from the human, the machine is said to have passed the test. The test does not check the ability to give the correct answer; it checks how closely the answer resembles typical human answers.

I wonder how many people have actually grasped the full implication of the above definition: that a machine can be essentially treated as sentient if it can trick an observer into thinking that it is as intelligent as a human being. It does not actually have to be capable of "free choice" like a human. It just needs to appear as though it's capable of making a free choice.

I've always wondered why the Turing Test is so easily accepted as the litmus test for sentience when it so cynically assumes that "free will" — that vital quality many of us intuitively associate with intelligent behaviour — is a trick.

So, rather than seeing a machine as the sentient equal of a human being, treat the human being instead as the mechanical equivalent of a machine. There is essentially no difference, just the reversal of a popular point of view. Hence, the situation in Ep3 presents no problems to a Dominator forced to make a spot evaluation on a threatening robot.

Originally Posted by Cosmic Eagle

Also how does free will being a process of our own brains make it an illusion? It's still our self that produces and is comprised of said chemical reactions that differs from person to person resulting in varied responses.

If it weren't even for said reactions the physical brain would not function.

It's a web of pathways said reactions can take but which pathway it takes is still a response to a host of various factors. A psychopath for example, has far less choice due to his wiring than a normal person. A normal person has far more possibility and potential perhaps.

That's the compatibilist view of free will and determinism and, indeed, the vast majority of thinkers today fall somewhere within this camp. Only a handful of outliers like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins take a serious objection to the view. Harris, I'm aware, likened compatibilism to the arguments espoused by the apologists for religion, which he takes a very dim view of. In Harris' view, you either believe that our every action is completely determined by our biology, or you don't. There is no in-between.

It's my hypothesis that the Sibyl System is more similar to Harris' views than those of compatibilism. It's clearly a system that takes determinism to the extreme, going so far as to definitively label a five-year-old as a potential criminal who has to be isolated from other people, based purely on the child's biological/psychological profile. "Free will" in this society is, in effect, a Hobson's choice. You don't actually have a choice. If you're born diseased, you're doomed to be stuck with medication for life, or until someone finds a cure.