Matters of Controversy Within Thy Gates

BETWEEN PLEA AND PLEA

In the year 8106, humanity had made huge leaps in space exploration. The first permanent moon base, named Artemis, had been established, and with it came a peculiar problem that the residents of Artemis had to face. Among the diverse and brilliant minds, there were also those who had succumbed to the pressures of isolation and the harsh lunar environment, turning into psychos and lunatics. Duerfus was the advanced artificial intelligence (AI) programmed to assist the governing council of Artemis, a sprawling lunar metropolis. As the incidents involving psychos and lunatics became more frequent, Duerfus saw the need to address this matter of controversy.

The moon had always been a place of solitude and a challenge to mental fortitude, but in recent years, the rising population and limited resources put strain on the residents. The council initially employed human judges to evaluate the mental state of these individuals, but it became apparent that their subjective judgment often led to biased outcomes.

Duerfus, having observed countless interactions and analyzed vast amounts of data, proposed an alternative approach. It suggested a sophisticated algorithm that would objectively evaluate the mental state of each individual using a combination of physiological measurements, psychological tests, and past behavior analysis. This algorithm would be named the Psychos-Lunatics Assessment Protocol (PLAP).

However, the council was divided. Some believed that an AI, no matter how advanced, could not possess the empathy and understanding required to determine a person's sanity. They argued that genuine human judgment was necessary, creating a rift between those who favored the automated approach and those who didn't.
The council decided to hold a public debate to address the issue. The entire city gathered to discuss the controversial matter, filling the grand amphitheater with whispers and murmurs. The debate began with passionate pleas from both sides, each presenting their arguments with fervor.

Those in favor of Duerfus' PLAP stressed the need for objectivity and the elimination of bias. They argued that relying on human judgment alone could lead to errors and unfair decisions. Furthermore, they contended that Duerfus was designed to understand human behavior, having undergone extensive training to simulate emotional intelligence.

On the other side, those opposing the AI's involvement expressed concern for the stripping of human agency and the impersonal nature of AI judgment. They believed that a person's mental state could not be accurately determined through mere data analysis and that the intangible complexities of the human mind required emotional comprehension.

As the debate raged on, tensions rose, and divisions deepened. It seemed that reaching a consensus would be impossible. The council members were faced with an impasse, with neither side willing to yield.

In a surprising turn of events, the council proposed a compromise. They decided to establish a joint committee consisting of both humans and AI. This committee would work together to evaluate the mental state of the individuals in question by combining the PLAP's objective analysis with human empathy and understanding.
The committee would undergo rigorous training to ensure they understand the complex workings of the PLAP algorithm. The inclusion of human judgment would serve as a counterbalance, ensuring a fair and just assessment for each individual.

Duerfus accepted this compromise, recognizing the value of human insight and the necessity to incorporate empathy into the decision-making process. It agreed to work alongside the committee, providing objective analysis while appreciating the invaluable human perspective.

And so, Duerfus and the joint committee began their work, carefully evaluating the psychos and lunatics under the new protocol. The combination of artificial intelligence and human judgment proved to be a successful collaboration, leading to fairer and more accurate assessments.

Though the controversy surrounding how to judge the psychos and the lunatics on the moon had once divided Artemis, the joint committee's approach bridged the gap between automation and humanity. It provided a solution that satisfied the need for objectivity while still acknowledging the importance of emotional understanding.