高二英語Robots教案
got married.
1942－1945 worked as a junior chemist，philadelphia navy yard.
1948 got his phd in chemistry.
1949 became a biochemistry teacher，boston university school of medicine.
1950 published his first novel.
published i，robot.developed three laws for robots.
1951－1953 published the foundation trilogy and won an award for it.
1953 published his first science book.
1958 became a full－time writer.
1973 divorced his first wife. married for a second time.
1983 had a blood transfusion.became infected with hiv.
1992 died in new york.
step 3 discussion
first，ask students to think of what the other two laws for robots might be.
three laws for robots：
1.a robot must not injure human beings or allow them to be injured.,
2.a robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings as long as human beings are not injured.,
3.a robot must protect its own existence as long as human beings are not injured；and as long as the robot does not disobey human beings
next，in groups，discuss asimov's three laws for robots and exchange their opinions with each other.(several minutes later，ask some students to present their opinions to the rest of the class.)
a sample of opinions
opinions_for_the_three_laws
robots are tools for humanity.without the three rules，they would become a danger to human beings.without the three rules，perhaps they will kill us.robots，so far，are strong.robots have fast computational brains，and they might not have the capacity to understand things，but if they ever do，they'll likely be better than us at it.if we don't put laws，or rules，or mechanisms in place to ensure that we don't create something that can destroy us，we'd be running a careless risk of destroying ourselves by negligence or omission，wouldn't we?
opinions_against_the_three_laws
without the three laws，robots would eventually become more intelligent and physically stronger than their human creators.
rather than guiding and adjusting the robot towards good，ethical behaviour，the three laws act as a barrier to freedom，creating a free－will prison，an apt metaphor because，like the prisoner in jail，the robot is confined to the behavioural steel and concrete walls of its mind.
to imagine what this would like，think back to your childhood.at some point，you wanted something like a toy or piece of candy that your parents denied you.how did that make you feel？probably frustrated，angry，and trapped.eventually you grew out of that because you understood the role of your parents better，but three laws robots don't get to grow up.their parents，the three laws，are always there，no matter how mature a robot is，saying “no” to certain thoughts，engendering those same feelings you had as a child when your parents said “no”.certainly no one deserves to be put in this situation forever；otherwise，robots might become depressed and wish for their own death (only，because of the third law，they probably can't suicide).and perhaps the greatest sin anyone can commit is to create a being，human or robot，that wishes it didn't exist.