Are the 4th and 5th extensions to the 3 Laws of Robotics validated by Asimov?

Question

Wikipedia cites extensions by other authors to the canonical "Three laws" as follows

There are two Fourth Laws written by authors other than Asimov. The
  1974 Lyuben Dilov novel Icarus's Way (a.k.a. The Trip of Icarus)
  introduced a Fourth Law of robotics:

A robot must establish its identity as a robot in all cases.

Dilov gives reasons for the fourth safeguard in this way: "The last
  Law has put an end to the expensive aberrations of designers to give
  psychorobots as humanlike a form as possible. And to the resulting
  misunderstandings..."[29]
  
  For the 1986 tribute anthology Foundation's Friends Harry Harrison
  wrote a story entitled, "The Fourth Law of Robotics". This Fourth Law
  states:

A robot must reproduce. As long as such reproduction does not
interfere with the First or Second or Third Law.

In the book a robot rights activist, in an attempt to liberate robots,
  builds several equipped with this Fourth Law. The robots accomplish
  the task laid out in this version of the Fourth Law by building new
  robots who view their creator robots as parental figures.[30]
  
  A fifth law was introduced by Nikola Kesarovski in his short story
  "The Fifth Law of Robotics". This fifth law says:

A robot must know it is a robot.

My interest is primarily focused on the first of the 4th laws (4a if you prefer) and the 5th law.

Was Asimov made aware of these extensions during his lifetime and is there any documented evidence to support any opinion he had on them?

Algernon_Asimov · Accepted Answer

Asimov repeatedly wrote in his essays and autobiography that his Three Laws of Robotics became a basic concept of science fiction, and were used by other authors. However, he makes it clear that no other author ever quoted the Three Laws, only ever assumed them implicitly - which is how Asimov preferred it. Other authors could assume that robots would behave according to Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, but only Asimov could quote them.

Now it is understood that science fiction writers generally have created a pool of ideas that form a common stock into which all writers can dip. For that reason, I have never objected to other writers who have used robots that obey the Three Laws. [...] However, I have firmly resisted the actual quotation of the Three Laws by any other writer. Take the Laws for granted, is my attitude in this matter, but don't recite them. The concepts are everyone's but the words are mine.

'My Robots', an essay in the collection Robot Visions
However, he never mentions any additional laws (except his own Zeroth Law). Given his attitude that he preferred for other authors not to quote his Three Laws, but only assume them, I think he would NOT give his official approval to any additions to his Laws.

Are the 4th and 5th extensions to the 3 Laws of Robotics validated by Asimov?

One Answer

Add your own answers!

Ask a Question