Is Hologram Moriority a living being?

[Squirrelfang]

In TNG, Data spent time in the Holodecks playing the part of Sherlock Holmes but, when it was getting too easy, they had the computer create a character that can challenge even Data. Thus, Holographic Moriority was born, a hologram that can think for itself and isn't controled by programming.

Is Holographic Moriority real? Is it possible for him to exist in the physical dimension? If he is real, does this mean that, at some level, perhaps all holographic entities are living things? When the program is shut down, does Moriority continue to exist? These are just some of the questions that he raises.

This thread is devoted to these questions. Feel free to ask questions, give your own answers, philosophize and argue. Have fun. confused  

[TPila]

I think Moriorty is a sentient being, if that's what you mean. I also think that it would be possible for him to interact in our physical world with one of those things (I'm terrible with technological terminology, portable holo emitter, is it?) that the EMH (The Doctor) on Voyager uses.  

[Lopan]

Yeah. I think he's real, and I agree with TPila. He's obviously sentient. I also think it's also an infringment of his rights to keep him locked in a holodeck. Then again, he's dangerous. What do you think?  

[Squirrelfang]

Personally, I agree that he is sentient, but this question is really just a catalyst for a lot of other questions. Is there a difference between being sentient and being real? Personally, I'm not completely sure. I know he's sentient, but he is still just a program on some computer somewhere. For all we know, we could all be programs on some computer somewhere. If that is so, would we be real? If all our actions and thoughts were part of some computer program, would we be sentient?

That being said, I would agree that he probably is real. However, this creates an entire group of new questions. If Moriority is real, does that make the other holodeck characters real as well? You may say no, because he's sentient and the others are not, but then, according to that logic, humans are real and rabbits are not. Are rabbits real? Unless you want to go into the various theorems of skeptism, I would say they must be. By granting Moriority reality, you grant reality to everything and anything that you can create on a holodeck.

So, pretend you recreate someone on the holodeck, programed to be just like that original person. Would the holodeck simulation and the program be the exact same? Would they both be real? Would either be real? Then, would it be ethical to ever shut down a holographic simulation. When Barcley creates the fantasy simulation where he's fighting people on the Enterprise, is he actually fighting people on the Enterprise? If you take part in a battle simulation on the holodeck, is that battle actually, at some level, repeating itself?

What is reality, actually? What can we call life? Can something be sentient without being alive? This one character brings up a lot of intriguing questions and, in my mind, they're not easilly answered.  

[TPila]

I see your point. I think you are as real as you think you are, I think it's all in the perception of things. Moriarty was completely satisfied when he thought he was in the real world. And also if you remember, it wasn't that he did or didn't deserve to be in the real world, it was a technical boundary of not being able to get off the holodeck. Moriarty became sentient in special circumstances. I think any other holodeck "being" is programmed to act specially.  

[Lindira]

I think if we were going to be strictly scientific here, no, Moriarty wouldn't be a living being, because he has no DNA or cells to speak of. Going by that criteria, Data or the EMH Doctor would not be alive either. Then, a rabbit or mosquito is more alive than Moriarty, the EMH, or Data could ever be. So that's why I voted No in the poll.

If, however, this were a question of whether Moriarty is a person, then we get into something else entirely. The debate then becomes soul-based or philosophical, rather than biological or scientific. I think Moriarty is a person, as much as the EMH and Data are. They are sentient. Even without going into whether they have a soul or not, they are people or "alive" (in a spiritual sense) because they have the capacity to grow and change. They have the ability to think beyond their programming, to become something other than just reflected light or neural processors.

So say we go back to your idea of the hologram that is programmed to act exactly like someone else... Let's use Picard as an example. Whether or not that hologram is "alive" would depend upon whether or not that hologram would be able to branch out of its programming. Say the real Picard went through something traumatic involving Earl Gray tea and he doesn't like it anymore. So now he likes Oolong tea. Here are a few scenarios to think about:

1) If the hologram was programmed to like Earl Gray tea and continued to like Earl Gray tea because that was what it was programmed to like, then it would not be "alive".
2) If the hologram was programmed to change with the real Picard and changed to like Oolong tea because that's what the real Picard likes now, then it would not be "alive".
3) If the hologram was programmed to change with the real Picard but continued to like Earl Gray tea because it liked Earl Gray tea, then it would show signs of "life" because it went against its nature. (though still not necessarily "alive")
4) If the hologram was programmed to like Earl Gray tea and changed to something different (Oolong, coffee, grape juice, whatever) at any time at all because it wanted to change, then it shows signs of "life".

There are other possible outcomes with the above scenarios. And that doesn't even go into the question you posed about what makes something real. (Cuz "alive" doesn't equal real, necessarily) But I'll stop rambling now because this is getting long... sweatdrop  

[Se Ga Takai]

can he die? We consider things alive, simply because we percieve them to hold the capacity of death. But, with Moriarty, he holds teh capacity for immortality. Though, he can be destroyed, by anything from the cube he was placed in taking extensive damage to something as simple as a voltage spike in the area. But is that death? I would consider it the same as deleting a program from your computer.

However, on that, no programs(that I know of) on your computer are sentient beings. Moriarty knew of his existance, could easily see the arch, even gained access and control of the computer and ship. And, by Lindiras analysis, he would need to follow his programming, though he went against it, totally rebelled, actually, by desiring freedom from teh holodeck, and pursuing it with all his ability.  

[Maddy]

Like Lindira said, I think the question should be if Moriarty is a person or not.

And the answer of that will depend on the definition of person to which you subscribe.
In this case, instead of going with what I think, I'll point to an episode where this very subject was discuss. In it, it was Data's existance as a person vs. an object perteining to Starfleet what was on stake. They made several good points on the subject.

(Unfortunately I don't have a copy handy to check each one of the issues discussed there... but you can check it).  

[Change (Revolution)]

He thinks, therefore he is.

Can't go wrong with Descartes.

He is clearly not a person. He is a thinking being, though, with emotions, thoughts, and ideas of his own. I'd like to see some of that mobile emiter technology given to him. I'd rather enjoy that.  

[Blaze-kun]

He is real, and he does exist in a physical dimension. The holodeck can create solid, though artificial, objects. If given the right technology, he can escape the confines of the holodeck.

As for whether he continues to exist when the program is shut down, Yes. The program still exists, even if it's not running. Once someone deletes the program, he stops existing.

Whether he has rights is a bigger question. Like Data he is an artificial lifeform. They should probably put him on trial.

Is he "alive"?? Is Data or any artificial lifeform.. really alive?  

[Wind-Whisper]

From a purely scientific viewpoint, he was no more alive that the silly little peope in my Sims2 game: created and programmed for a specific purpose within a limited scenario. He would have to fall into the real of articial intelligence, like Data: technically not a living organism, but so complex that he seems to be a living organism.