191 replies to this topic

[kylyssa]

kylyssa

kylyssa wrote> If those androids had sentience and emotions they would have equal value to humanity.
If they are self-aware they are people whether the platform they run on is biological or mechanical.




Stephen wrote> To think a couple (which is where this concept leads)
                        could 'adopt' an android is foolish. 
                        (Not to mention marriage!)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.imdb.com/...t0212720/quotes

Ours will be a perfect child caught in a freezeframe. Always loving, never ill, never changing. With all the childless couples yearning in vain for a license our Mecha will not only open up a new market but fill a great human need.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  I guess I should have assumed that an illusion of a boy, and a boy that
  came from a union of a man and woman, would be regarded as the same
  at imminst.
 

-Stephen

It looks like I'm right, you could destroy any non-human intelligence without remorse by using your
religion to prove they were without value. You could probably even destroy a clone.

If a being thought and felt it would be a person - a non-human person.


Your arrogance is breathtaking. If human beings create non-human intelligence how do you know
it isn't your God's plan? How can you claim to know the mind of God? If you believe that male humans
are made in God's image, is that image not the image of a creator, one who creates? It's what we've
done since we became self-aware - we've created.

[william7]

Stephen wrote> You're denying the eternal punishment of the wicked.

Yes, if you mean in the sense that God will subject them to eternal torture. You should fully read the free booklet Heaven & Hell: What Does The Bible Really Teach?, at http://www.gnmagazin.../biblespeak.htm. I have it linked to a chapter that should give you pause and maybe make you rethink your beliefs on this matter.

[Mangala]

Kylyssa's right. Stephen is so strict in his views he'd slip easily into fundamentalist murder.

[stephenszpak]

I assume you all know what 'code' is. Your microwave runs on computer
code and so do the primitive robots of today and decades from now. Your
microwave has no consciousness. A logic gate in
a microwave's microprocessor works the same as a logic gate in a robots's
microprocessor.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Logic_gate


What if you could chat with your microwave about your
personal life? You know, talk to you about what you have been doing lately,
and your hopes and fears. Would that make your microwave alive? No,
it's still an oven.

Little kids watching TV may see an illusionist 'change' a women into a tiger
and back again, but it doesn't really happen, even if these kids think it does.
It was an illusion.

Machines can't be murdered. Read previous sentence.

Androids (if they ever could be manufactuered) would be machines.
The techs that have to repair these things when they break know full well
they are just machines lying there on the carts. Each one turned off , so
it can't walk away, {man what a hassle that is!} each one with a description
of what it's doing wrong on the tag attached to it.

So no negative comments on 'adopting' an android as in the movie AI?
Maybe such a thing is considered totally reasonable.

What about marrying an android? Hey, some here say that humans and
androids are both alive right? (or are we machines?
"Humans ARE sophisticated robots." -hankconn)

So some guy in the 22nd century marries an android. GM model 2200.
She doesn't sleep. She doesn't eat. She doesn't breathe.
She *can* benchpress 1000 pounds. She *can* compute the cube root
of a 20 digit number in a spilt second. She *can* see in the dark.
She is a machine.
Like this could ever work out!

But what if the Model 2200 could feel emotions?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kylyssa wrote> If a being thought and felt it would be a person - a non-human person.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A machine can't feel emotions. There would be lines of code which would
trigger when certain events happen. The running of this code would produce
tears, as one example. Giving the illusion of an expression of
pain, happiness, relief, or whatever.


So how did we get here?

My desire in this subject was to try to get people to think of themselves
as more than just spiritless machines.

-Stephen

[stephenszpak]

My desire in this subject was to try to get people to think of themselves
as more than just spiritless machines.

You are conflating the supernatural "spirit" with the real-world "spirit". If you want to argue for the supernatural part, do it in a different thread. If you want to argue for the physical part, like I said, you are conflating it with your previously rejected supernatural beliefs.

I realize this thread is beyond off-topic at this point.
It seems I haven't been clear in my posts, unfortunately neither do I understand
what you've said above.

-Stephen

[william7]

My desire in this subject was to try to get people to think of themselves
as more than just spiritless machines.

I have to agree with you on this. Man is much more than a spiritless machine. Building a machine with a greater spirit than man can't be done by man in my opinion.

Computer scientists trying to build an artificial intelligence to be a god over man should rethink their plans and lower their sights a little bit. I think a better plan would be to build a highly sophisticated computerized system to keep a worldwide kibbutz society running smoothly and in harmony. A kind of checks and balances system to keep us all advancing together and from straying off course. This would do much to advance the cause of science and technology and religion too if it were done in the right way.

[stephenszpak]

Stephen wrote> You're denying the eternal punishment of the wicked.

Yes, if you mean in the sense that God will subject them to eternal torture. You should fully read the free booklet Heaven & Hell: What Does The Bible Really Teach?, at http://www.gnmagazin.../biblespeak.htm. I have it linked to a chapter that should give you pause and maybe make you rethink your beliefs on this matter.

This is a courtesy response.
I don't agree.

-Stephen

[william7]

You are attacking a gross characterization of Singularitarianism that stems from a completely lack of understanding or knowledge about it

So, are you saying that Singulartarianism isn't about making a superintelligent computer system that will be godlike? True, I've read very little about Singulartarianism and do not claim any expertise in this area.

and then you are supplying an unrealistic solution to a completely unrelated problem...

This is a matter of opinion. I think the solution I supply is related to the problem and a very realistic one. Something similar to what I'm proposing was mentioned in Alvin Toffler's book Creating a New Civilization.

[william7]

This is a courtesy response.
I don't agree.

Then you believe God will subject those who are disobedient to Him to eternal torture or torture without end?

[samson]

This was a good thread, up until you wee fucks started with the bible thumping. Do I have to ask how many here want, let alone NEED it? But as all conversations, this too evol-, whoops! Wrong word, devolve would be more appropriate, as we have devolved from the original topic to debate it's terms, Ie. religion.

So what is this mysterious "spirit" or "soul" ye speak of, o great priests? Where can I *see* one, where can I *observe* it's effects, where can I see the PROOF of this interesting phenomena? You see, religious thruths carry no inherint value or meaning here. Get to the proofing part. Other than the lack of proof of the supposed existance of "spirit" (a.k.a. "soul"), you (nor anyone else) have not presented a satisfying definition of this entity we are supposed to have. So I ask, o priests, what is SOUL? What is SPIRIT?

Other than that, I would now like to express my deep disgust with the bible as a work of literature, poetry, and philosophy. The bible contains so disgusting ideas, values, texts and morals, that I categorize it as bigoted hate-literature. And even if you take the most vulgar and racist parts out of it, it still is bullshit. Both the values and philosophies are badly argumented for and contain innumerable amount of fallacies. Granted, it has many "good" parts about compassion and etc, but one bad apple ruins the whole damn bunch, especially when it's purported authority applies to the whole book.

[kylyssa]

The [airquote] spirit [/airquote] or [airquote] soul [/airquote] is no more than the thinking, feeling mind - a product of a lovely, complex biological machine called the brain. Cells, chemicals, electrical impulses - these are your [airquote] soul. [/airquote]

If the brain is not who we are then how is it that damaging the brain can change who we are on the most basic level? If the organic machine that we are is damaged we change because we are that organic machine.

If we manage to create a machine as complex or even more complex than our own brains it is easy to imagine a machine with a [airquote] soul.[/airquote] If it thinks and has opinions, if it feels it is a person.

Edited by kylyssa, 12 January 2007 - 05:06 AM.

[braz]

This was a good thread, up until you wee fucks started with the bible thumping. Do I have to ask how many here want, let alone NEED it? But as all conversations, this too evol-, whoops! Wrong word, devolve would be more appropriate, as we have devolved from the original topic to debate it's terms, Ie. religion.

So what is this mysterious "spirit" or "soul" ye speak of, o great priests? Where can I *see* one, where can I *observe* it's effects, where can I see the PROOF of this interesting phenomena? You see, religious thruths carry no inherint value or meaning here. Get to the proofing part. Other than the lack of proof of the supposed existance of "spirit" (a.k.a. "soul"), you (nor anyone else) have not presented a satisfying definition of this entity we are supposed to have. So I ask, o priests, what is SOUL? What is SPIRIT?

Other than that, I would now like to express my deep disgust with the bible as a work of literature, poetry, and philosophy. The bible contains so disgusting ideas, values, texts and morals, that I categorize it as bigoted hate-literature. And even if you take the most vulgar and racist parts out of it, it still is bullshit. Both the values and philosophies are badly argumented for and contain innumerable amount of fallacies. Granted, it has many "good" parts about compassion and etc, but one bad apple ruins the whole damn bunch, especially when it's purported authority applies to the whole book.

Gotta love the passion in your words, Samson [lol] You are definitely right about the complete lack of proof in favor of mystical/religious outlooks, and there are certainly very few books out there that are more vile, disgusting, racist, hateful and senseless then the Holy Bible. I keep on wondering what all of these religious folks who believe in the immortal soul are doing here in the first place?

[Aegist]

The "spirit" or "soul" is no more than the thinking, feeling mind - a product of a lovely, complex biological machine called the brain.  Cells, chemicals, electrical impulses - these are your soul. 

So the brain is your soul? Or the mind is your soul?

hang on, why double define? We have words for the soul...Brain...and mind... Why would people speak of the qualities of the soul when they could talk about the mind directly? More importantly, why does the soul always get given qualities that extend far beyond the qualities given to the brain or the mind?

If the brain is not who we are then how is it that damaging the brain can change who we are on the most basic level?  If the organic machine that we are is damaged we change because we are that organic machine.

If we manage to create a machine as complex or even more complex than our own brains it is easy to imagine a machine with a "soul."  If it thinks and has opinions, if it feels it is a person.

But why invoke a mystical word like 'soul' to express this? More accurate would be to say 'Mind'. Brain is easy, even mechanical brain is easy. It is consciousness, and the manifestation of a mind which is really questionable when it comes to AI.

The soul is a different concept to both, and there is no argument available to support the proposition of a soul, let alone evidence.

[lunarsolarpower]

So the brain is your soul? Or the mind is your soul?

hang on, why double define? We have words for the soul...Brain...and mind... Why would people speak of the qualities of the soul when they could talk about the mind directly? More importantly, why does the soul always get given qualities that extend far beyond the qualities given to the brain or the mind?

Perhaps the soul is actually in the brainstem + hypothalamus...

Or maybe it is an effect of DMT?

[Aegist]

..Or maybe its in the third hair follicle from your left pinky finger.

There is equal evidence for both suggestions...

[kylyssa]

The "spirit" or "soul" is no more than the thinking, feeling mind - a product of a lovely, complex biological machine called the brain.  Cells, chemicals, electrical impulses - these are your soul. 

So the brain is your soul? Or the mind is your soul?

hang on, why double define? We have words for the soul...Brain...and mind... Why would people speak of the qualities of the soul when they could talk about the mind directly? More importantly, why does the soul always get given qualities that extend far beyond the qualities given to the brain or the mind?

If the brain is not who we are then how is it that damaging the brain can change who we are on the most basic level?  If the organic machine that we are is damaged we change because we are that organic machine.

If we manage to create a machine as complex or even more complex than our own brains it is easy to imagine a machine with a "soul."  If it thinks and has opinions, if it feels it is a person.

But why invoke a mystical word like 'soul' to express this? More accurate would be to say 'Mind'. Brain is easy, even mechanical brain is easy. It is consciousness, and the manifestation of a mind which is really questionable when it comes to AI.

The soul is a different concept to both, and there is no argument available to support the proposition of a soul, let alone evidence.

I'm just saying there is no mystical [airquote] soul. [/airquote] Those things the religious perceive as [airquote] soul [/airquote] are just the mind, the emotions, the sense of self. I only use the word [airquote] spirit [/airquote] or [airquote] soul [/airquote] in sarcasm, poetic license, or argument. The [airquote] soul [/airquote] is not anything beyond the mind or the brain. The "I" that I am is a meat machine, no mystical mumbo humbo, just a product of millions of years of evolution, an accomodating womb, and decades of happenstance culminating in a unique personality. To me, that is far more wondrous than a supernatural being casting a magic spell and creating each and every one of us.

What I'm trying to get across is that when communicating with people who speak in the language of [airquote] spirits [/airquote] and [airquote] souls [/airquote] sometimes it's an effective tool to use the language right back at them.

Besides, does one have to lose all sense of poetry and emotion to be part of a discussion? Especially when discussing something with people ruled by emotion and superstition?

Edited by kylyssa, 12 January 2007 - 05:10 AM.

[Aegist]

Sounds like we have essentially idential perspectives on the topic of souls, but our difference in choice about use of language creates problems, which is what my point was really. i don't see any need to use the word Soul, when Soul is loaded with mystical religious superstitions. If you try to redefine soul to just describe our body brain mind, then you are just creating confusion because most people won't know that you intend to use it ironically....

IMO....

[lunarsolarpower]

most people won't know that you intend to use it ironically....

Jay did create the [airquote] airquote [/airquote] function for us to avoid this problem

[vortexentity]

Perhaps the human mind is the holographic storage and information retrieval interface for the soul and the soul is not really physical but something like the breath, a temporary resident in the body and not a part of the physical self as it were.

[kylyssa]

^ There, I think I raped the [airquote] air quote [/airquote] enough for one night. ^

Who looks at smilies anyway?

[jdog]

Perhaps the soul is actually in the brainstem + hypothalamus...

Or maybe it is an effect of DMT?

Thanks for this link [thumb]

[stephenszpak]

The quote below is interesting (I think):

"If and when we do construct intelligent, autonomous machines, they
will surely be aliens, as unlike us as a 747 is unlike a sparrow.

John Horgan ("The End of Science")
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can a switch feel an emotion? A light switch for example?
A logic gate is basically a switch. Take as many logic gates as
you want and make an android. The resultant android still won't
be able to feel a single emotion.

Machines can't feel. They are not alive.
Humans can feel. We are alive.

No one here has had any experience with an android. Something
to keep in mind. All androids we've seen or read about are totally fictitious.

I (and perhaps others
here) have seen 'The Offspring' a very touching episode of The Next
Generation. In it Data creates an android "child" of his own.

http://en.wikipedia....g_(TNG_episode)

It has a very sad ending. Some quotes are here:

Data: "Lal, I am unable to correct the system failure."
Lal: "I know."
Data: "We must say good-bye now."
Lal: "I feel...."
Data: "What do you feel, Lal?"
Lal: "I love you, Father."
Data: "I wish I could feel it with you."
Lal: "I will feel it for both of us. Thank you for my life..."


http://maltedmedia.c...m-20061018.html

Let's all remember what's going on here. It is a suspension of disbelief.
The same feeling of loss occurs when your favorite fictitional character
is killed off. We know the actor is still alive. But we have no idea (in most
cases) what a specific actor or actress is like in real life. We have however
watched and listened to the character on TV for a number of years,( or
just a few minutes, as in the cited Next Generation episode).

Humans develop emotional attachments to things all the time.
Money and expensive toys especially.

===============================================

Just came across this totally by accident. Interesting, if true>>>>>>

More than half the owners of iRobot's Roomba name their device, claims the Burlington, Massachussetts, company. Owners often talk to their machines, and many treat them as though they were alive, or semi-sentient, anyway. Some even take them on holiday, unwilling to leave them at home alone.

"We have people who actually consider them their companion, even though it's just vacuuming their floor," said iRobot spokeswoman Nancy Dussault. "People get attached to them and think of them as part of their family. It's almost a pet. It makes them feel like they're not alone. It's really interesting how they've taken to their robots."


Scientists believe that robot pets trigger a hard-wired nurturing response in humans. It appears robot vacuums tap into the same instincts.



http://www.wired.com...2,59249,00.html

-Stephen

[Karomesis]

There is no evidence of supernatural phenomenon

Can we accept this statement for the purposes of this thread and please MOVE ON ????
....thanks

amen brotha [lol]

163 posts in this thread? holy shiite muslim that's alot. [:o]

[kylyssa]

OK, back to the original question.

Mangala is looking for an alternative to religion to provide the following five things:

    1.  A community of supportive people
    2.  Meaning
    3.  Purpose
    4.  Guidance during adverse times
    5.  Moral guidelines

To me, this doesn't sound like a religion but more like a society or village - a community. A community usually has provisions for all those things.

1. The members of the community stand for each other and support each other.
2. People derive meaning from their belief in the community, their desire for its success.
3. People derive a sense of purpose from their contribution to the community.
4. Elders, specialists, or other sympathetic and knowledgeable people within the community can be consulted for guidance and help.
5. The community can decide its morality based on the happy, peaceful, survival of the community.

[william7]

May be the Singularitarian community can join hands with the International Communal Studies Association and search for a solution to the problem of a community without God and the Bible until such time as God shows Himself and makes it self evident what direction mankind must take to solve the problems of the world. See http://www.ic.org/icsa/about.html.

[braz]

May be the Singularitarian community can join hands with the International Communal Studies Association and search for a solution to the problem of a community without God and the Bible until such time as God shows Himself and makes it self evident what direction mankind must take to solve the problems of the world. See http://www.ic.org/icsa/about.html.

Have fun waiting for the voice from the skies...

[Aegist]

May be the Singularitarian community can join hands with the International Communal Studies Association and search for a solution to the problem of a community without God and the Bible until such time as God shows Himself and makes it self evident what direction mankind must take to solve the problems of the world. See http://www.ic.org/icsa/about.html.

LOL. Community without God and the Bible....as if that is an unnatural state. Right, nice warped perspective there.

[Karomesis]

LOL. Community without God and the Bible....as if that is an unnatural state. Right, nice warped perspective there.

yes, unfortunately our religious freind is in dire need of a reprogram of his frontal lobe region to alleviate his "religious experiences" [glasses]

all in due time Elija.......all in due time. [sfty]

[william7]

Sounds like you have all been badly influenced by abnormal psychology course in school. Psychosurgery was a failure in modifying human behavior for psychiatric purposes. Superiority of belief system over those felt to be inferior also a failure and continues to be a failure. I think it's you guys who badly need to learn a few things about making a real community from the link I provided in my last post.

[Aegist]

Sounds like you have all been badly influenced by abnormal psychology course in school. Psychosurgery was a failure in modifying human behavior for psychiatric purposes. Superiority of belief system over those felt to be inferior also a failure and continues to be a failure.  I think it's you guys who badly need to learn a few things about making a real community from the link I provided in my last post.

Ummm... you're the one who said:

May be the Singularitarian community can join hands with the International Communal Studies Association and search for a solution to the problem of a community without God and the Bible until such time as God shows Himself and makes it self evident what direction mankind must take to solve the problems of the world

That is, you are the one who has simply presumed that belief in God is the only option, and that everyone who doesn't believe in God is simply in error until he can show himself. You don't even give other beliefs the courtesy of points of refutation, your statement indicates clear dismissal of alternative options. Believe in God if you want, believe in thor if you want, believe in Mohammed. Whatever...But don't presume you know something that other people just haven't figured out yet, because for all of your certainty, there are many more people out there who have equal and opposite certainty in their beliefs in Allah, Ganesh, Bhudda, Thor etc etc etc.

Religious belief can only be looked at as a strange phenomenon. That isn't a judgement of the belief itself, just an observation on human behaviour.