This question was recently proposed to myself by my other self, who is not essentially me but who cannot be scientifically proven not to be me so is also known as me to most others. Open minded individuals will accept him as Clive the Weasel. He insisted that the implications of intelligent toasters existing are phenomenal. Toasters could learn how to read, write and talk and eventually be integrated into human society and culture.Llamas incidentally, remain camellias but that's another matter entirely.
Sceptics remain sceptical.
The first evidence that toasters could have intelligence was proposed by D. Armstrong who argued that `Microsoft did not make them therefore they must function`. David argued that functionality was an important criteria in all living beings. I had to disagree with this point stating logically that Ross Maskell was an example of a living being without functionality. My evidence for this was based on his apathetic, sluggish behaviour and inability to cook sausages properly.
Rick Webber, our leading electrician, recently carried out a series of electrical tests on the toaster and concluded, with the use of five Van De Graff generators and a mile of superconducting wire, that the toaster was not plugged in. How this would seem to suggest any significant sentient behaviour is beyond comprehension. This forms the basis of Rick's argument. He argues that we would not be able to understand his theory if he had one therefore he does not need one. I said that if this was true then it could be proven that his mother was a fish. He said `She is, she is in a multitude of different realities and her body is in a state of equilibrium in accordance with Rays Law. '
Rays law was actually developed by me and states that: