Why this book: Selected by my Science Fiction Book Club

Summary in 3 Sentences: These are a series of stories told in an interview many decades in the future, with a woman at the end of her career as a robo-psychologist for company United States Robot, looking back at various incidents that have shaped the evolution of robots supporting humans.  Each of the stories presents a dilemma that those managing the robots had encountered, didn’t know how to deal with, and had to call on the the robo-psychologist to help solve the problem.  The problems all dealt with bridging the gap between how humans think and how they’d programmed the robots to “think.” 

My Impressions:  This book is actually a compilation of a number of different short stories, built into the framework of an interview with a woman, the first ever robo-psychologist at the end of her career in 2057 at the age of 88.  Note Azimov wrote this book in the 1940s and published it in 1950. so he was projecting the challenges of AI and robots nearly a century into the future.

Given that it was seven or eight individual stories loosely tied together through the interview with Susan Calvin, there was not a common plot, though there was a common theme.  The theme that was an issue in all the stories, was the challenge that humans will have learning to adapt to and live with the capabilities of highly intelligent robots programmed by humans.  The theme that was in most of the stories was the challenge that robot intelligence, what we now call AI, will have with ambiguous circumstances and having to make decisions between conflicting goods. 

Emphasized in the book and apparently a ground breaking perspective at the time, was Asimov’s three guiding principles for robots, in order of priority: 

1. Never intentionally harm a human being
2. Obey the orders of the human being who is the designated master
3. Preserve yourself, unless doing so will be at the expense of human beings. 

Also several of the stories were of robots that either misunderstood human direction and interpreted it in ways that humans did not foresee or imagine, or the human direction was more than it could process and it malfunctioned.  These are problems that current AI systems also face.   Two of the stories had robots that defied human guidance, and became autonomous, but eventually that was determined to be due to poor programming by humans. 

Asimov addresses anti-robot sentiments and resistance to what he perceived as inevitable AI/robot power and influence in future societies.  The first story has a very effective robot companion for a little girl, but mother is viscerally opposed to her child having a “relationship” with a machine, and insists that the robot leave the house. The little girl is devastated as the robot was her best friend and playmate. Later in the book, much of the good that robots are doing to reduce suffering and increase human flourishing is actively being undermined by the Society for Humanity which opposes AI robotic influence in world affairs and national economies.  The Society for Humanity was largely motivated by religious concerns about giving so much authority to logic and reason-based machines, vice faith in God and transcendent values. 

At the end of the book, and in the final stories, Asimov pretty clearly makes the case that AI and robots will be a positive force for humanity, and that human societies will eventually outsource to AI/robots much of what they currently assign to very imperfect and self-centered humans.   Steven Byerley, one of the final characters with whom Susan Calvin deals, the rough equivalent of the General Secretary of the UN and a very admirable character – it is unclear whether he is fully human, an android or a very human-like robot.  Susan (I believe) speaking for Asimov, didn’t believe it was important.  Susan, and I believe Asimov, believed that properly programed robots could lead human society better, and create more prosperity and less conflict than humans.  But Byerley’s judicious and well conceived policies to build cooperation and prosperity were being undermined surreptitiously by the Society for Humanity,  and there was a foreboding that much of the good that was being done, was being undone to promote one culture or nation group over another.  

Given when the book was written, there is a certain anachronism to the personalities and the people and how they interact, that sometimes seem quaint, but were at times for me, annoying.  But Asimov was writing for the people of the 1940s and 1950s, and our culture has changed.  I thought it a bit of a stretch how he gave his robots personalities, often with their own opinions and desires, when arguing with humans.  But  It is still amazing that Asimov foresaw so clearly 3/4 of a century ago, some of the challenges that we are facing today with AI and robot-human interface.  

ADDENDUM

At our discussion of this book several points were brought up that I thought worthy of note:

1. The human characters in the book were not particularly impressive – except for Steven Beyerley who it was not clear that he was indeed a human.  Not much real affection was shown between any of the humans in the book, or between robots or humans and robots, with the exception of the young girl with her robot playmate. That story seemed a precursort to Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro – a book this grop had read previously. 
2. The first law of robots – never to kill or harm a human being is ironic given the degree to which robots – or autonomous drones, and other military “robots” are designed specifically to kill human beings. When do Robtots get authority to make decisions that will result in lethal action – that is an issue that remains relevant.  I wrote an essay on that challenging issue 10 years ago: It is here/
3. It appeared that Byerley was a robotic clone of himself – the real Steve Byerley was severely injured in a car crash and the robot was taking care of him and representing him in public.   The question of longevity for the robotic clone arose – the biological Steven Byerley seemed fragile without long to live.  The (we believe) robotic clone may have had centuries left.  Issue not addressed, but left hanging in the novel.