Miss Jung ends her article with the question if parenthood and octogeny are related. Although I would say this is not the case (there being a difference between being a mother and being a mom, adopted children being a thing, etc.), it is still interesting to note that is seems like a logical next step. Can octogeny be improved by giving robots the biological urge to procreate, and the societal idea of motherly love? How would this affect their mode of building? Is this an anthropocentric ideal imposed on a machine without function?

Miss Jung does posit that the relationship between robots and humans is that robots don't have parenthood towards their children. But a robot can have parenthood towards our children, just as we can have parenthood towards the children of others. I would argue that with robots, the process will always be decidedly of a productive nature, and not given in by love and affection, even if we manage to simulate it perfectly. In this way, the process loses something 'magical', which we might consider the biggest difference between artificial and biological creatures.

We might, however, achieve more succes by reversing the process. In Japan, 'dunce robots' are used to help children learn empathy and communication skills. The children teach the robot and help him with tasks. In this way, robot growth is achieved by humans, and the process is reciprocal in that the children learn as well. Perhaps octogeny can be improved by making the process a two-way street in this way as well (robots learning from their productions in lieu of 'raising' them).