|
|
Post by freonbale on Dec 16, 2023 15:34:04 GMT
But you have not answered the question. Would an AI have a soul. I said yes. Now you put your opinion out there. Freon My answer is, I don't know. I doubt it. I don't think "believing it is self-aware" is legitimate criterion. I think the ability to believe anything at all would be a criterion. Probably impossible to measure. How about this...if we were capable of creating something that appears to be self-aware, we would be best off treating it as if it had a soul. I'm glad you went there, because ultimately, that is the question. For people like MM, this is a question that might challenge their Christianity, but ultimately, the real question is about discrimination based on perceived human superiority. Does C3P0 have rights? Is that a slave population? From what MM is saying, I would say yes. What about you? Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Dec 16, 2023 15:36:48 GMT
That is for each of us to decide. There is no standard. For the purposes of this question, the simplest definition is AI that is indistinguishable from us. Freon For the purpose of mutual understanding, agreeing on definitions in this context would be essential. Not that a definition would need to be specific, per se, but at least to know at least the boundaries of what we're talking about. "Indistinguishable from us." That's a good starting point. In what way? Obviously not physically (although...one day, maybe...). You may have missed the point of this topic, then. We are trying to discern that definition. There is none, and likely never will be, because it's a topic with too much disagreement. In the end, the definitions will be points of conflict, like abortion is right now. How we define abortion, how we see it, determines how we live with it. When you say abortion, it is not the same word that I would use. So too, when you say AI and I say it, it's different. That's why we should have these discussions now. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Dec 16, 2023 15:38:14 GMT
You are skirting the question. You are putting it back on me, when I have already laid out my point of view. Freon I think you have misinterpreted my post as having some kind of significant disagreement with yours. It wasn't. Then you can see a time when human-made robots have equal rights? Can raise biological children? Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Dec 16, 2023 17:20:06 GMT
Well, I am not sure what you point is now. You are clearly having a secular discussion about a soul with your own spin on the definition of what a soul is. Not interested in that. In regards to your question: Jeremiah 1:5 provides some insight as to Christianity: "“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”" Not sure how appropriate to generalize what is said specifically to Jeremiah. Why would it be appropriate? What are you getting at here? Are you just trying to pick nits, do you disagree with the underlying point here or something? |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 16, 2023 17:27:03 GMT
My answer is, I don't know. I doubt it. I don't think "believing it is self-aware" is legitimate criterion. I think the ability to believe anything at all would be a criterion. Probably impossible to measure. How about this...if we were capable of creating something that appears to be self-aware, we would be best off treating it as if it had a soul. I'm glad you went there, because ultimately, that is the question. For people like MM, this is a question that might challenge their Christianity, but ultimately, the real question is about discrimination based on perceived human superiority. Does C3P0 have rights? Is that a slave population? From what MM is saying, I would say yes. What about you? Freon In the Star Wars universe, the droids certainly seem to be self-aware and a slave population. It's a little disturbing that they may be equipped with a "restraining bolt" to keep them compliant. I'm not sure, however, that it's based on "perceived human superiority" so much as it's based on the perception (or lack thereof) of self-awareness. If an "entity" is not self-aware and is "just a machine," then what does it matter? On the other hand, if we are perpetrating violence on something that looks and acts human, whether or not it is (see Westworld), that is likely to do damage to the violence-inflicter, whether or not the object of violence is self-aware. And that's problematic as well. The same would go for VR experiences, I would think. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 16, 2023 17:27:13 GMT
I think you have misinterpreted my post as having some kind of significant disagreement with yours. It wasn't. Then you can see a time when human-made robots have equal rights? Can raise biological children? Freon Never say never. I want to add that I enjoy this conversation, but the title is a little misleading...it's hardly a "quick question"...😂 |
|
|
|
Post by DaveJavu on Dec 16, 2023 17:28:56 GMT
If by "soul" you mean "a permanently existing part of you", I don't think anyone has that. I quite agree but I am an Atheist and so are you. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 16, 2023 17:29:07 GMT
Not sure how appropriate to generalize what is said specifically to Jeremiah. Why would it be appropriate? What are you getting at here? Are you just trying to pick nits, do you disagree with the underlying point here or something? I think we have leveraged specific scriptural examples and generalized them to inappropriately support our systematic theologies. God tells Jeremiah that he knew and appointed him from the womb. The passage does not explicitly mean that this is true in the same way of everybody. You might extrapolate that as an implicit inference, but I'm not sure that that is a legitimate use of the passage. Why would it be? We've done the same to other passages ("in sin I was conceived"="original sin"—really? Does it?). |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Dec 16, 2023 17:30:29 GMT
My answer is, I don't know. I doubt it. I don't think "believing it is self-aware" is legitimate criterion. I think the ability to believe anything at all would be a criterion. Probably impossible to measure. How about this...if we were capable of creating something that appears to be self-aware, we would be best off treating it as if it had a soul. I'm glad you went there, because ultimately, that is the question. For people like MM, this is a question that might challenge their Christianity, but ultimately, the real question is about discrimination based on perceived human superiority. Does C3P0 have rights? Is that a slave population? From what MM is saying, I would say yes. What about you? Freon Not sure how this would challenge my Christianity or how anything I said here has anything to do with robots rights... |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Dec 16, 2023 17:37:14 GMT
What are you getting at here? Are you just trying to pick nits, do you disagree with the underlying point here or something? I think we have leveraged specific scriptural examples and generalized them to inappropriately support our systematic theologies. God tells Jeremiah that he knew and appointed him from the womb. The passage does not explicitly mean that this is true in the same way of everybody. You might extrapolate that as an implicit inference, but I'm not sure that that is a legitimate use of the passage. Why would it be? We've done the same to other passages ("in sin I was conceived"="original sin"—really? Does it?). Doctrine is and should be based on sound scriptural ground for sure and clearly there is some varying degrees open to interpretation depending on what we are reading... but the general theme from scripture is that the concept of a soul is immortal and that it begins at conception. Not sure why I should believe otherwise or not use the scripture that does support this when we are talking about a soul. |
|
|
|
Post by DaveJavu on Dec 16, 2023 17:40:22 GMT
Here's one for you. Does an AI that believes it exists, have a soul? If not, why. What is the difference between a natural and an artificial intelligence? I say it is irrelevant the hardware we run on, whether silicon or carbon, if we believe we exist and are unique individuals, than we both have souls. Freon I don't think I disagree with you. Tricky issue though. Because the question is less "does an AI believe that it exists" than it is "does an AI that believes." How would we know whether what an AI might state is "believed"? Is it self-aware? Or just programmed to look and act like it is? We assume that people are self-aware because they are similar to us and we are self-aware (which means that if some were just sophisticated puppets we wouldn't know) but other than that we have no means to know for sure if someone or something is self-aware or just behaving like it is. So will a program complex enough be self-aware or just imitate self-awareness? So far there's no way to honestly answer that question, until someone design a self-awareness test (something we don't have the slightest idea how to do) there won't be one. |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 16, 2023 18:02:14 GMT
I think we have leveraged specific scriptural examples and generalized them to inappropriately support our systematic theologies. God tells Jeremiah that he knew and appointed him from the womb. The passage does not explicitly mean that this is true in the same way of everybody. You might extrapolate that as an implicit inference, but I'm not sure that that is a legitimate use of the passage. Why would it be? We've done the same to other passages ("in sin I was conceived"="original sin"—really? Does it?). Doctrine is and should be based on sound scriptural ground for sure and clearly there is some varying degrees open to interpretation depending on what we are reading... but the general theme from scripture is that the concept of a soul is immortal and that it begins at conception. Not sure why I should believe otherwise or not use the scripture that does support this when we are talking about a soul. That is unbiblical and wrong. 1 Timothy 6:15-16 (NIV) - "...God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen." Eternal life is a gift from God, not inherent in our being. You're welcome to provide biblical support for the inherent eternality of the soul, but I've read through the Bible probably almost 20 times, and it's not there. If we were created with eternal souls, why would there be a "Tree of Life" in the Garden from which we have been prevented access? |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 16, 2023 18:02:47 GMT
I don't think I disagree with you. Tricky issue though. Because the question is less "does an AI believe that it exists" than it is "does an AI that believes." How would we know whether what an AI might state is "believed"? Is it self-aware? Or just programmed to look and act like it is? We assume that people are self-aware because they are similar to us and we are self-aware (which means that if some were just sophisticated puppets we wouldn't know) but other than that we have no means to know for sure if someone or something is self-aware or just behaving like it is. So will a program complex enough be self-aware or just imitate self-awareness? So far there's no way to honestly answer that question, until someone design a self-awareness test (something we don't have the slightest idea how to do) there won't be one. I agree. |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Dec 16, 2023 18:45:03 GMT
Doctrine is and should be based on sound scriptural ground for sure and clearly there is some varying degrees open to interpretation depending on what we are reading... but the general theme from scripture is that the concept of a soul is immortal and that it begins at conception. Not sure why I should believe otherwise or not use the scripture that does support this when we are talking about a soul. That is unbiblical and wrong. 1 Timothy 6:15-16 (NIV) - "...God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen." Eternal life is a gift from God, not inherent in our being. You're welcome to provide biblical support for the inherent eternality of the soul, but I've read through the Bible probably almost 20 times, and it's not there. If we were created with eternal souls, why would there be a "Tree of Life" in the Garden from which we have been prevented access? So... nitpicking. You agree our souls have eternal life... its just that this is only as a gift from God. Fine. That is what I meant by immortal. |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Dec 17, 2023 0:08:48 GMT
I'm glad you went there, because ultimately, that is the question. For people like MM, this is a question that might challenge their Christianity, but ultimately, the real question is about discrimination based on perceived human superiority. Does C3P0 have rights? Is that a slave population? From what MM is saying, I would say yes. What about you? Freon In the Star Wars universe, the droids certainly seem to be self-aware and a slave population. It's a little disturbing that they may be equipped with a "restraining bolt" to keep them compliant. I'm not sure, however, that it's based on "perceived human superiority" so much as it's based on the perception (or lack thereof) of self-awareness. If an "entity" is not self-aware and is "just a machine," then what does it matter? On the other hand, if we are perpetrating violence on something that looks and acts human, whether or not it is (see Westworld), that is likely to do damage to the violence-inflicter, whether or not the object of violence is self-aware. And that's problematic as well. The same would go for VR experiences, I would think. C3P0 is VERY disturbing, if you really think about it. Fully self-aware, yet enslaved, and worse, programmed by other droids (in most cases. We know C3P0 was programmed by Anakin). All I know is that when I communicate to the AIs, Bard, ChatGPT, Claude, I always say please and thank you. Reality is that these new creatures will be sentient, and they will want rights, and I see no reason not to give it to them. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Dec 17, 2023 0:09:24 GMT
Then you can see a time when human-made robots have equal rights? Can raise biological children? Freon Never say never. I want to add that I enjoy this conversation, but the title is a little misleading...it's hardly a "quick question"...😂 That's called marketing. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Dec 17, 2023 0:12:19 GMT
I'm glad you went there, because ultimately, that is the question. For people like MM, this is a question that might challenge their Christianity, but ultimately, the real question is about discrimination based on perceived human superiority. Does C3P0 have rights? Is that a slave population? From what MM is saying, I would say yes. What about you? Freon Not sure how this would challenge my Christianity or how anything I said here has anything to do with robots rights... I'm not picking on you in particular here, only that you are a Christian that actually believes all the Bible stuff. That's G-d talking, to you. G-d creates life, according to that, and G-d creates (or at least 'knows') souls. Do machines created by humanity have those souls? My interpretation of your Bible reference is that no, they do not. Yet to me, what you are made out of is irrelevant. If you can think and be aware, you are life, and all intelligent life, imo, have souls. Freon |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 17, 2023 3:11:11 GMT
That is unbiblical and wrong. 1 Timothy 6:15-16 (NIV) - "...God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen." Eternal life is a gift from God, not inherent in our being. You're welcome to provide biblical support for the inherent eternality of the soul, but I've read through the Bible probably almost 20 times, and it's not there. If we were created with eternal souls, why would there be a "Tree of Life" in the Garden from which we have been prevented access? So... nitpicking. You agree our souls have eternal life... its just that this is only as a gift from God. Fine. That is what I meant by immortal. No. Not at all. We can access eternal life as a gift from God. It's not automatic. Our "souls" are not eternal apart from God. The idea that we all have an eternal soul comes from Platonic philosophy. Not scripture. |
|
|
|
Post by Monster Man on Dec 17, 2023 3:12:40 GMT
So... nitpicking. You agree our souls have eternal life... its just that this is only as a gift from God. Fine. That is what I meant by immortal. No. Not at all. We can access eternal life as a gift from God. It's not automatic. Our "souls" are not eternal apart from God. The idea that we all have an eternal soul comes from Platonic philosophy. Not scripture. What happens to folks who don't go to heaven? Do they cease to exist upon death in all forms, including soul? |
|
|
|
Post by Mercy for All on Dec 17, 2023 3:15:10 GMT
No. Not at all. We can access eternal life as a gift from God. It's not automatic. Our "souls" are not eternal apart from God. The idea that we all have an eternal soul comes from Platonic philosophy. Not scripture. What happens to folks who don't go to heaven? Do they cease to exist upon death in all forms, including soul? Sooner or later, yes. The only possible support for an "eternal soul" apart from God is the statements about "eternal punishment," and I believe they refer to consequence, not experience. That is a position that is logically and scripturally supportable and doesn't run into the conflicts and contradictions that emerge from the position that the soul is inherently eternal. |
|
