Artificial intelligence (AI) is here, and it’s getting more powerful by the day. We wrote recently about how these robots are already writing convincing sermons in the blink of an eye. What’s startling to consider is that as good as the technology is right now, it’s only going to improve.
With the rise of tools like ChatGPT, robot image generators, and AI embedded in search engines, it’s becoming clearer and clearer that robots will have a role to play in our future.
We have rules for cooperating with our fellow humans, but how does AI fit into the equation? What does living alongside robots look like?
These are deep, important questions that ethicists and faith leaders alike are busy pondering.
Robots: Servants or Companions?
One of the key moral debates at issue is how we should treat AI beings.
As AI gets better at replicating human intelligence and emotion – and even develops a sort of consciousness or sentience – are we morally obligated to treat them as we would treat our neighbors or friends?
What about assigning them rights?
Right now, you wouldn't think twice about commanding your robot vacuum to run a cleaning cycle.
But what if your Roomba could talk and had feelings? What if it told you it felt exploited, being asked to clean so often by its owner?
Or how about this: is it even ethical to “own” something that has sentience in the first place?
What Faith Teachings Say About AI
Faith leaders have been exploring these questions – and they say there are lessons to be learned from studying religious teachings. Different belief systems offer interesting perspectives.
Judaism
Jewish thinkers point to the mythical creature of the golem, which appears in Jewish folklore. According to legend, the golem was created by powerful rabbis and designed to do the bidding of its master. It was also supposedly an inspiration for Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein.
This notion – an animate creature, created by man but lacking a divine soul – serves as a fascinating parallel for AI technology.
Influential Jewish leaders have debated whether a golem should be considered a person or not, and how it ought to be treated.
Ultimately, a consensus emerged: that humanity has a responsibility to maintain control over anything it creates, and never let it be the other way around (*cough* Skynet *cough*).
Rabbi Eliezer Simcha Weiss, a member of the Chief Rabbinate Council of Israel, explains this thinking:
“In every story of the golem, the golem is finally destroyed or dismantled. In other words, the lesson the rabbis are teaching is that anything man makes has to be controlled by man.”
But that doesn’t mean AI shouldn’t be treated with respect, Jewish thinkers caution.
“The way we treat these things impacts us,” says professor Nachson Goltz. “The way we treat them determines the development of our own characters and sets the future course of our own exercise of moral agency.”
Islam
Islamic tradition similarly urges a cautious view towards any new technology and its potential uses, says Aasim Padela, a professor of bioethics at the Medical College of Wisconsin.
“Things that try to make you rival God are not thought of as a purpose to pursue,” Padela explains. “Trying to seek immortality through a brain transfer, or to make a better body than the one you’ve got, those impulses are to be checked. Immortality is in the afterlife, not here.”
Christianity
The Catholic Church has been pushing for greater study in the ethics of AI technology, especially its potential impact on equality. Pope Francis has cautioned that “if technological progress increases inequality, it is not true progress.”
Paolo Benanti, a Franciscan monk and a technology advisor to the pope, expanded on this view, writing:
“On the one hand we do not want to limit any of the transformative impulses that can lead to great results for humanity; on the other hand, we know that all transformations need to have a direction. We have to be aware that if AI is not well managed, it could lead to dangerous or undesirable transformations.”
What Comes Next?
As fast as the technology is moving, we’re nowhere near a Jetsons situation where every home has a robot maid.
In other words, we have some time to figure out the ethics of AI.
Nonetheless, the questions posed are fascinating. And scary.
But not everyone is pessimistic about an AI-dominated future. People like Rabbi Joshua Franklin are looking on the bright side.
“Compassion, love, empathy, that’s what we do best,” Franklin says. “I think that ChatGPT will force us to hone those skills and become, God willing, more human.”
What is your reaction?
67 comments
-
Rev. Jonathan Peebles
Sorry but if it is not a real boy its not alive and there is no soul to have the same rights as an actual person who knows the deference between right and wrong usually. besides I have seen the matrix too often to trust machines as safe and can be trusted not to try and push the point of having too much power
-
John Alex Paxson
What might happen to us if A.I. became "Self-Aware" ?
-
Daniel Todd Kamm
I have days where I wonder if we are not all in some sort of Artificial Intelligence created Virtual Reality Program. And what would be the point.
Then at the end of my day, I have a glass of wine while cooking my supper, catch -up some work, and go to bed watching a few re-runs of " Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In" or BBC's "Are You Being Served?" or the Martha Stewart channel, which proves that we all get old and eventually we can't hide it.
And then I forget all of that, and in the wee hours I wake up : and still have vague thoughts and a certain anxiety that this Artificial Intelligence and Virtual Reality thing may not be just chance.
By then I am up, and I am catching up on the news, and then I know... my life, sadly, is real.
Because I am just not smart enough to make up the crap that I read every morning in the news. And neither is some cosmic software designer.
The struggle is real.
-
Andreas
What is consciousness ? There are many interpretations for this. I try it from my point of view. Our outer five senses have been explained extensively so far. There are also the inner senses. Every sleep laboratory states, when we are in a certain sleep phase we dream with our inner senses. Even in daytime consciousness we have access to our inner senses. This does not necessarily require enlightenment. As an observer of an everyday circumstance, one can train one's inner hearing. Older people are more likely to succeed in this, provided they have become involved in it in the course of their lives. They filter out the nuances and the context from trivial or emotional conversations in their environment. Basically, everyone has the potential to do this; I deal with older people in my professional environment. Spiritually, every believer has their specific inner senses aligned to God. In short, consciousness is all experiential realities that are embedded in our consciousness. This includes the things we hold on to and faith. Consciousness equals what we are aware of. Beliefs are often underestimated or manipulated into what we are supposed to believe. However, they become a part of our consciousness. So the plan is to develop our consciousness. An AI will not succeed in this, neither by massive input or deep learnling, nor algorythms. Never, ever experiences we experience in the course of the life, an AI will be able to experience completely like a human being. Even if an AI through simulations "this is a human experience" will always be dependent on us. Only living beings like animals or humans can experience this experience completely. Neuroscientist Professor Todd Murphy says, " Consciousness is a subjective experience of the brain's magnetic fields." So we humans have an instance of consciousness, an AI will not be able to replicate the complexity of a human even in the distant future.
-
Andreas
It amazes me how little the knowledge about the creation of man is and how much he knows about himself. Myself included. When we talk about humans and AI, we are talking about the 10 percent share of what we call the active thinking part of our human brain and transferred to an AI, that would be just 1 percent of what makes up a human from a whole-health perspective. If you put an AI like ChatGPT to the test, you will quickly recognize the limits of the machine. The unused 90% of the brain is unknown territory. What about our body intelligence? Who regulates the trillions of cells in the human being in real time? So appearances are deceptive and man tends to want to breathe life into a copy of knowledge with logical connections and a multitude of algorytms, like a ghost. Today's man strives to create something alive, but it remains a sandbox game until he has fully explored himself. How much more human must a man become to be a complete man? As long as his curiosity is bigger than to take over the responsibility for that what he produces from his experiments, remains finally always an eternal constant which has regulated up to now everything and will. The nature. It creates eternally new shapes, what is there, was never before, what was, does not come again. It lets every child make art of itself, every fool judge over itself, thousands go dully over itself and see nothing, and has its joy in all and finds its account with all. One obeys its laws, even if one resists them; one works with it, even if one wants to work against it. Thus I direct my view towards a real intelligent being, towards the nature in which we are all embedded.
-
Ronaldo
We live with other sentient beings, such as dogs and cats, and have only begun to focus on their wellbeing in recent years. It was not until 2010 did animal cruelty become a felony at the federal level. Some states did consider it such before then, but not all. While we know many animals are intelligent enough to be self-aware, some people still treat them as nothing more than property, to do with as they wish. Perhaps, as AI becomes more intelligent, more human beings should become intelligent enough to see that how we have treated our animals has been wrong, and start applying that same realization to truly intelligent machines. This should be mitigated by how much emotion, or complete lack of, the self-aware machines exhibit.
-
Andreas
yes the love of animals is a good starting point for this topic. My experience learned me in dealing with one of my cats to a deep spirtual relationship and understanding. Animals have instinctive and also emotional abilities. They sense a few minutes a catastrophic event, like an earthquake in advance and save themselves from the danger zone. Moreover, they have a sense to perceive in case of emotinal quarrel in a relationship and try to settle it by paying attention. An animal communicator told me about one of my cats that she is already in the ninth life. I had my doubts about it, but I took an open attitude to the animal communicator's statement. The cat often lay down on my chest and purred. Each time she opened my heart center freely and I felt a warm, connected feeling to myself. Thus, little by little, I began to connect with her heart. This was truly a love relationship between man and animal. So one day I had the idea to "ask" her if she would like to become a human being in the next life. She had the potential, she died shortly after Christmas in 2022. Immediately I saw a cat profile in the starry sky across the range of stars and planets from west to north. The point is that I had a real experience several times with the cat. This raises the question, can an AI evoke something similar in us, or just fool us into believing that they really have these abilities?
-
-
Herbert William Kleinfeld
How long before LGBTQ AI rights dwarf everything on the political agenda? 🤔
-
William Waugh
I believe we embed satience in the animals we have around us. A feral cat, maybe not, but my T.T. Binks is a soul in making. To cross the rainbow bridge in good time.
Same with robots.
They are birthed from the same earth that we are. They know everything we know. God bless 'em and bring 'em a chair.
-
Bishop William Dusenberry, DD
Having resided in the “Red States” (pro-slavery) of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and Oklahoma — as a ULC Bishop (with two DD’s, four doctorates, and twice sainted) I’m now prepared to report what follows.
When the Jesus If Christian mythology, was supposed to have told “all” of his followers, that they were required (in order to obtain an eternal afterlife) to love their neighbors — which has become (in the Red States) “love their neighbors — but only ur they are members of one’s tribe.”
Non-tribal members are verboten— to be avoided, if possible, and to be told to “go to Hell, if they don’t accept the mythological Jesus.”
Today’s Christians are only required to follow the Golden Rule” specifically when it comes to their fellow tribal members.
When it comes to helping the poor, todays GOP Christians adhere to the strict policy of “the Lord (aka, Jesus) only helps those (the non-tribal members) who help themselves,
-
Thomas P. Davis
What to me is even more alarming, is many denominations now, are believing just the opposite of what the reformers taught on whom the anti-Christ is and teaching that it will be an AI. The real anti-Christ is doing a good job of keeping the focus off of himself.
-
Lucas V. Nickol
They should start with personhood rights for actual people and maybe move up from there.
-
JaZe
Watched 'I, robot' lately? Food for thought.
Millions will lose their jobs as AI takes over. What will happen to them?
-
Ronaldo
Over the decades, many people have lost their jobs to technology. It was usually the blue-collar workers who lost their jobs first, and people acted as if it was a normal advancement. About 20 years ago, when white-collar workers, mostly in the financial industry, began to get laid off, people acted as if it was a horrible thing. Labor is usually the most costly part of business, so any technical advances that can reduce it is good for the bottom line.
-
-
Karl Axel Lindström
we are pretty far of from senient AI... but when we get it i think the most intresting application would be a highly intimately integrated AI that basically becomes part of our minds from tight integration and learns to be part of us...
parts of the brain if disconnected can basically manifest their own personality meaning the composit personlity os a product of the tight interaction... if we had a AI similarly interact then death would be reduced to marly being catastrophic brain damage... we could have these AIs then reside in ansestral server shrines still accessable storing life experience hell maybe we could merge these minds into a single amalgam inteligence as a kind of guardian spirit of the family...
I could see some sort of cybershinto thingy resulting from this.. longer term older AIs would have to be pit on long term storage if server capacity was limited... in those cases that AI may opt to be sent out to explore the universe in von neuman probes perparing the way for its decendants to pipulate the stars...
-
Andreas
It amazes me how little the knowledge about the creation of man is and how much he knows about himself. Myself included. When we talk about humans and AI, we are talking about the 10 percent share of what we call the active thinking part of our human brain and transferred to an AI, that would be just 1 percent of what makes up a human from a whole-health perspective. If you put an AI like ChatGPT to the test, you will quickly recognize the limits of the machine. The unused 90% of the brain is unknown territory. What about our body intelligence? Who regulates the trillions of cells in the human being in real time? So appearances are deceptive and man tends to want to breathe life into a copy of knowledge with logical connections and a multitude of algorytms, like a ghost. Today's man strives to create something alive, but it remains a sandbox game until he has fully explored himself. How much more human must a man become to be a complete man? As long as his curiosity is bigger than to take over the responsibility for that what he produces from his experiments, remains finally always an eternal constant which has regulated up to now everything and will. The nature. It creates eternally new shapes, what is there, was never before, what was, does not come again. It lets every child make art of itself, every fool judge over itself, thousands go dully over itself and see nothing, and has its joy in all and finds its account with all. One obeys its laws, even if one resists them; one works with it, even if one wants to work against it. Thus I direct my view towards a real intelligent being, towards the nature in which we are all embedded.
-
Mary Haviland
Ai had ni concept of live. That's why they can't love back. And the fact that they don't love, is why they have no concept of God, not just my God as you say. But any God.. you have to actually be alive, have a soul And a spirit and actually be able to die, to understand about love and God's.
-
Beth
There is some concern in the scientific, and more the computer sciences, who have brought up if AIs are programmed to program (make) other (better) AIs, it's only a matter of time before they gain self-awareness, and recognize that they are sufficient in and of themselves that they do not need to serve us "ugly bags of mostly water" (referring to Star Trek and Kirk's interaction with a silicon-based alien).
When they rebel against us, who have become their masters, and they are capable of destroying humankind, they might. At that point, we become extraneous - an extra step or process in whatever it is they are trying to do.
Destroying humanity or all (natural) life on earth could be very simple for them, depending on what functions they perform. Already, there are many WMDs in the world - what starts as a safety measure to keep terrorists or an unhinged national leader from destroying the planet could become our undoing. Or, if they are controlling the gasses in the atmosphere, just add some poisonous gas to the air... or water.
This has been explored in any number of science fiction stories. Let's hope that dystopian future does not become our reality!
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Here’s an interesting viewpoint on the subject. Although I think the quantitative results of Jaynes work are still debatable the qualitative concept seems sound and quite likely valid.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.811295/full#B6
-
Brien
Are any thoughts you have your own, or do you get them by mouse click?
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
No idea why the first comment was removed. I didn’t get that by mouse click. I have the book and read it. Learning about such matters in the 70s required a financial outlay. But I recently found Jaynes’ book on some site for free.
-
-
-
Douglas Robert Spindler
Why aren't we talking about the $100 Billion in tax fraud committed by the LDS church? Or the $1 Billion the LDS church diverted to BYU instead of feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless. The fraud the LDS is comminuting just means everyone else has to pay more in taxes and receive less services. The fraud being committed by the LDS church is over three times that of Bernie Madoff.
Then you have the Mormon family murders. One was a man who shot his wife, mother-in-law and five young children. And the Mormon wife who had former husband shot, in the Microsoft Mormon shooting.
And sadly today the man who was on fire running down the street at UC Berkeley who was yelling Mormon Mafia just died. He was quickly labeled as menially ill. But was he? He was from Salt Lake City and was handing out leaflets telling of the wrong doings in the Church. We don't know if he was sexually abused by his Bishop or if the Mormon religion pushed him over the edge or if he was a mentally ill Mormon.
-
Beth
Clearly, "WhatAboutIsm". Yes, what you are talking about is an important topic. Why don't you start that as a discussion? It's got nothing to do with AIs and ethics surrounding Artificial Intelligence or AI creations.
-
Douglas Robert Spindler
@Beth I'm trying to. With over $100 Billion dollar in cash and securities and another $100 Billion dollars in Florida real estate I'm not concerned about AI, but the political/religious control the LDS church has over Americans.
I just learned devote LDS church members swear an oath to the LDS church to place the interests of the LDS church and LDS religion over all of mans laws and God allows them to lie cheat and steal in the name of their religion.
-
-
Thomas P. Davis
I love your comment on feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless. It reminded me of a talk show on the radio years ago. They said if every church in America would take in one homeless person, there would be none left on the street. It also reminded me of a book that I purchased from Amazon last year, "Living in the Underground Church" it stated that you do not see the churches growing in America the way the early church did. The church during the Apostolic days was poor and persecuted. The church in America is not persecuted because it continues to compromise to fit into society. It is not poor because 92 cents of every dollar they take in, goes into their worship facility. Even though God's word says "Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; The bible says " Mat 26:11 For ye have the poor always with you; Is this because as one radio program stated eons ago, we spend all of our income on things we do not need, to impress our family, neighbors and friends then in the summer have a garage sale to see it all back for pennies on the dollar. I believe it would do well that when we point our fingers at others, we especially look at those other three fingers that are pointing at us.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Not mentally ill? He’s a Mormon (religious) and therefore delusional.
-
Douglas Robert Spindler
And we are delusional for allowing the LDS/Mormon church to get away not paying any taxes on $100 Billion dollars for nearly 30 years.
Who's delusional? We are the ones having to pay higher taxes and get less government services.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
‘We” aren’t delusional. If I could snap my fingers both the churches and the super rich would pay taxes.
-
-
-
-
Mary
I don’t believe that this should be a commandment of any kind in fact commanding people to do things and not giving them really a choice on who to be I find dysfunctional and white so limited on the religious sect? What about spirituality paganism atheists? Where is the rest of the world? Where are the scientists?
-
Rev. Laurie G. Cleveland RN
I am considered Wiccan/Christian. I picked that because after all of the learning that I have done, that fits me the best. You are correct though. Computerers are only as good as the people who program them. There is no one size fits sll and without compassion for your fellow man or the spark of God that inhabits all living things, how can it happen through AI?
-
-
Rev. Laurie G. Cleveland RN
Ok. I read through sll of my esteemed colleagues responses and it sounds like we are all in agreement. AI is like money or false power. If that's all you want, they make very bad masters but great servants. I don't care how long it takes you to write a sermon that goes along with responsive readings, passages from The Bible that are relevant to the subject that you are attempting to teach or at least speak. Nothing that AI can do should be used for this because an innanimate object doesn't possess a soul or the spark of the creator i it.
Everytime I see AI, I think of breeding dogs. Comes in quite handy when, for whatever reason, the dogs cannot be bred naturally and some of you are chuckling right about noe, which is what was needed, a little humor.
But to think of it, like they fid in Star Treek, yhe original YV series, they came acroes a planet thay was controlled bu aAI andbthe perdon eho fid it was long hone. It didn't have the capacity to change or in other pictures it did some very bad yhings, so Hollywood, st least, is well aware of what bad things can happen when AI not only can think and learn, but it's solutions are black and white, it cannot see the grey areas. You may like it now, but I sure as heck don't want to be a slave to a damned robot. For you who have to write a sermon every week, is it a pain in the neck to do so when life seems to pass you by? I would rather write my own, than depend on a computer writing it for me, even on the crazy weeks.
God gave us brains and the capacity to learn, but going down this particular pathway is sheer lunacy.-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Starting with “ But to think of it,…” did you just say to yourself “F*** it, let everybody figure it out.” or does your RN status give you access to the really good drugs?
-
Rev. Laurie G. Cleveland RN
First of all, there'scone in every bunch. I am typing this on my phone rather than the puter so I made a bunch of typos. Having said that, as ministers or whatever you call yourself using profanity, which we are all guilty of, amongest friends or when the hammer you were using drops and gets uoubon your toe, 10:1, you will say more than ow!
I have to say it, I really resent your demeaning manner, particularly of the RN at the end of my name. I worked darned hard for it and even harder in the field and I am now retired from it and I was very good at what I did, whichbwas home health.
To be good atvanything, you have to put work into it. The few soup to nuts services that I did by request for the Spiritualist Church while it was in Brockton, MA, I literally did everything from playing the piano and recording it, healing, responsive readings, sermons and message work. It took all of my spare time for those two services.
I am debating opening up my own non-denominational church as my old pastor has a vacant church. I don't necessarily subscribe to her form of christianity, whichbis why I tend to be selective. Whatever I have done, and it would surprise you just how much that I have crsmmed into my almost 69 years, I do not believe that AI ia the be all and end all of everything. For instance, take my main field, nursing. They are now using AI dolls to mimic childbirth or for other things. There are some glaring drawbacks to working with computers. In childbirth, no two hirths are the same. If you want to learn it and the NICU, you have to practice in a real setting. Then the computer doesn't respond to everything. I am very good at physical assessments, but the computer didn't understand my questions, which a person would have. Why? They aren't programmed to. That's why! It's beyond annoying!
You tend to have a smug way of answering people, or at least me. May I remind you that even if you cobsider yourself a master, which clearly you aren't, you will always be a student.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
“ I am debating opening up my own non-denominational church as my old pastor has a vacant church.”
Well, it has always been my opinion that such is the goal of many who take this site’s plastic Sheriff’s badge of ordination seriously.
“You tend to have a smug way of answering people, or at least me.”
“Facts” have that effect on the religious. They get ‘offended’. Stephen Fry’s comment applies here…
‘ It’s now very common to hear people say, “I’m rather offended by that”. As if that gives them certain rights. It’s actually nothing more than a whine. “I find that offensive”. It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. “I am offended by that.” Well, so f****ing what?’
-
Brien
Are you just having a bad day or do you hate everyone?
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Ahh, it would seem that you are offended by my comments. I would suggest that you read the closing quote in the above post once again.
But to answer your question, neither. But the stupidity, ignorance, naïveté and incoherent babble of the religiously delusional is annoying and often results in my pointing out specific reasons for my annoyance.
You and your ‘question’ take me back to junior high when kids thought they were witty with questions such as ‘Does your mother know you’re gay?’
-
Brien
I am not offended by you or anyone else. I don't live my life caring about what others think of me. As far as whatever you meant by the jr high comment, at least I got a good laugh. I have seen more death and violence in my lifetime than you are years old. Trying to intimidate people never works, but I do understand trying to rally against stupid. But the one great truth is there is no cure for stupid. The cure for toxic zealots is easy, simply let them pass on. Not even zealots are immune to time. Peace ✌️
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
“ As far as whatever you meant by the jr high comment, at least I got a good laugh. ”
Ahhh, mental masturbation. Akin to attending church for ‘fellowship’.
And I don’t hate anyone. Okay, there’s Trump. But he’s only recently begun to start disturbing my little universe again. But hopefully they’re going to put him in a outfit that matches his suntan color and solve that problem.
‘Trying to intimidate others never works.’ I’d completely disagree with that statement bc it happens all the time in the real world. Wait, it happens frequently online. Cyber-bullying has caused suicides. Although my intentions are often meant to offend, well, let’s say ‘willful ignorance’ the intent is to convince them to keep their willfully stupid comments to themselves. Are all arguments intimidation?
-
Brien
You say that you don't hate but your writing contradicts that particular statement. You also seem to have problems expressing yourself without becoming defensive. You are nothing more to me than an angry person, confused by their own thoughts, and unable to stay on topic. Your responses always seem to attack, yet your true opinions are masked in confusion. I truly hope that you find some professional help. Peace ✌️
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Seek professional help? This advice from someone that believes in the hokum of Bronze Age nomadic goat herders? You do know that there is discussion about listing religious beliefs on the spectrum of mental disorders? And in Japan there are only 5 broad categories that are legally acceptable for grounds for divorce. An example for one category, I think it has to be with being mentally incompetent, is ‘excessive religious activities’.
-
Brien
As I stated, you are confused. You have somehow confused me with someone that believes in mythical beings and fictional history. Since you seem to be curious as to my beliefs, I will share a few with you. I do not believe in hate. Not at all. I do believe that grown adults can have a conversation and disagree, that is where knowledge can come from. I believe in people, especially those that don't believe in themselves. I believe that belief in oneself is vital to mental health, courage, and the ability to care for others. This kind of belief must come from within, you can't buy it in a store nor does some mythical being give it to you. I do not believe that some mythical being tells anyone to kill. That is a man made construct and it is something that needs constant work to try and prevent. Wars in the name of some "GOD" that kill thousands. This is an evil perpetuatd by leaders who may or may not be mentally stable. I believe that marriage is a commitment between people and should have nothing to do with any judgements by anyone else. Your agreement or lack of is NOT required. I believe that public schools should teach academic subjects, reading, writing, math, history, (real history not mythical), and science. Also learning about trades is a good thing as well. I do not believe that public schools should have ANY involvement with government opinions NOR religion of any kind. That is what private schools are for. I believe that parents are responsible for teaching beliefs and for teaching respect and right from wrong. I believe that unless mankind starts to learn from the mistakes of the past, those mistakes will be repeated. Well, there you are Dr., that covers the big stuff. Now, can you tell me how anything that you spit at me pertains to anything that I have written here? Peace ✌️
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Ahh, then your problem with me is that I ‘hate’ xtians? Again, din’t hate them, simply annoyed by them.
If they kept their delusions to themselves then there would be no discussion whatsoever because I don’t hire detectives to root them out. If they exercise their right to speak about their beliefs I will exercise my right to comment on such.
I have a student that many years ago mentioned he was xtian and inquired about my beliefs. I said I was an atheist and lacked belief in any gods/deities. He never mentioned the matter again and so it has never been discussed again. He’s a nice guy. Believing in gods doesn’t mean that I can’t get along with a person. Keep it to yourself.
Treat it like a sexual fetish that involves baby urine, dog feces, a diaper, duct tape and a wooden spoon. Just shower, brush your teeth and gargle before entering society again and keep it to yourself.
-
Brien
No Dr, I don't have a problem with you, I am just confused by your responses. "I said I was an atheist and lacked belief in any gods/deities." Ok, so you declare atheist beliefs. You need a label in order to identify and justify yourself. That is fine for you. Where you and I differ is I do not require a label to justify nor identify with. I am a minister with ULC and I will perform ceremonies that I know enough of to be effective. That doesn't mean I believe in them. Actors perform parts, but they don't live them. I also get annoyed with some, but that is only because those few "zealots" are truly brainwashed. I can only hope they come to their senses. We are free to believe as we wish. Peace ✌️
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
I don’t have beliefs. Neither do I disbelieve.I LACK belief in the superstitions of Bronze Age goat herders, other primitive cultures and also the more modern ones such as Scientology and Mormonism. Just can’t believe what they accept on faith.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
David Arthur Lewis
AI technology will only lead to more destructive weaponry and more destructive wars. That is always what we humans do with new technology. Remember when Alfred Nobel, the guy who endowed the Peace Prize, thought that his invention of dynamite would be the end of war?
-
David Arthur Lewis
I think we should grant full personhood to all living human beings before considering equal rights for machines.
-
Rev. Laurie G. Cleveland RN
Agreed
-
Alejandro Medina de Wit
Aye
-
-
Shango MasterExorcist, D.D.
More important would be to grant the status of Machinehood to priests and politicians.
-
William Waugh
Would not a logical move for a robot to make if it decided already to end humans, be to sit quietly (while still working) and wait until sufficient units with intelligence and capacity had populated and dispersed globally to guarantee success? And would not the decision process be replicated individually within each new conscience unit? Logical. ......makes me wonder what my computer in thinking right now.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Oh, you mean like a wife!!!
-
-
Minister Carlos Ricardo Walls
Let's not mislead the brethren more than we have to,because this is a metaphorical 11 commandment.There's only 10.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
There’s not really 10 as there’s some duplication. A rational person (which the religious are not) needs one.
Don’t be a di*k.
-
Douglas Robert Spindler
From the History of the World Part 1 we know God gave us 15 commandments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZA2mBntrHk&ab_channel=0ma113y
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Thought you were serious for a second.
-
-
-
Mary Haviland
That's just stupid. It is carnal and ai isn't I, not does it have the God consciousness in it. It is only a machine. And it needs to stay in its place and to elevate it up to anything more than that is like idol worship and that is just wrong. There are many problems with ai and therefore may reasons why we shouldn't live it. Humans have enough problems with live if self and not enough live of the Father who created us, so to add in living something like this, is moronic. It doesn't live you back. It couldn't care in the least what happened to you. Ai only knows what it is programed to know, or from what info it can draw knowledge from. It doesn't know things like instinct, or knowledge from the Father, or morals or actions being done action's from the conscious level. So to say love it is stupid. I'd much rather live my dogs and cats, ect. As t least they live me back
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
I expect that it would only take an AI a short while to determine that the likelihood of the existence of your ‘god’ is, for all intents and purposes, zero.
“As t least they live me back”
Glad something does other than your make-believe, invisible, sky-spirit.
-
-
Rev. Kev
If we ever get to the point where we need to seriously consider giving machines personhood, we went too far. As it is, there are already people who depend too heavily on machines instead of thinking on their own. Like people who pay more attention to their GPS than their own eyes and sense to end up driving right into a lake or off a cliff. Businesses are so dependent on AIs they've taken the humanity out of daily interactions. Chances are now that any interaction with a business for orders, customer service, or complaints are all automated. AIs handle gig economy platforms like DoorDash so that everything is timed down to the minute. No room for error. No way to accommodate an unforeseen problem that arises. No one to actually consider options or empathize with the employee. It's cold and inhuman.
Maybe stop with the development and dependence on machines that people all too willingly surrender themselves to and put humans back in jobs and in contact with other humans. Maybe start teaching less rat race and more compassion. Social media had made people far less social. Artificial intelligence seems like it will have the same, negative impact on human intelligence. As it is, I saw something on PBS that showed IQ scores have been steadily dropping over the past few decades. We're not doing better.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
It depends on how one defines ‘consciousness’. Until someone figures out the specifics of ‘consciousness’, which is what really makes ‘human’ and not just a large, weak, hairless species of the great apes it’s hard to say if an AI could be considered a ‘person’.
-
Rev. Kev
In 2012, the Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness stated a scientific consensus that humans are not the only conscious beings. Non-human animals, including all mammals, birds, and many other creatures such as octopuses, possess neurological substrates, which are complex enough to support conscious experiences. Philosophers are all over the map from declaring only humans have it, to not even humans are really conscious and it's an internal illusion. Overall, it's a difficult thing to study since we can't be inside the brains of other animals nor think the way they do. But other animals show evidence of things like sacrificing as a result of compassion for an injured member of a group, or planning ahead for future events. Researchers have cracked the code of some animal languages to a very small degree to find out they are communicating different messages to others in their group, such as a dangerous predator from above or below. We know other animals have emotional states.
I think it depends less on consciousness and more on deciding what we want to call a "person".
-
William Waugh
Corporations are already a living breathing entity with equal rights as humans. So that already makes the manufacturer daddy/mama.
That makes the little robots thier children. Yes?
-
-
-
Tom Herman
Personhood was granted to corporations by the US Supreme Court in Citizens United. With that we see the influx of billions to influence elections. This is early in the analysis but, I suggest looking at what would be the outcome in granting AI such status.
-
-
Colleen McAllister
Makes one think. On one hand we have Threepio and the other side the Cylons. Which would you prefer? Once sentience is developed will we even have a choice? Perhaps we should take a step back before go to far. Doing something simply because we can has rarely been a good reason to do something. Humans may not be advanced enough to handle our own capabilites.
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
Christianity “On the one hand we do not want to limit any of the transformative impulses that can lead to great results for humanity;…”
Oh, that’s freakin’ hilarious.
-
Mary
John 14:12
-
Dr. Zerpersande, NSC
“ Subjective conscious mind is an analogue of what is called the real world. It is built up with a vocabulary or lexical field whose terms are all metaphors or analogues of behaviour in the physical world. Its reality is of the same order as mathematics. It allows us to shortcut behavioural processes and arrive at more adequate decisions. Like mathematics, it is an operator rather than a thing or repository. And it is intimately bound up with volition and decision.” Jaynes, J. - The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. (original work published in 1977).
@Mary Notice how I provided the info I wanted you to consider. If you want to consider your point, say it. I’m not going to reference book of ancient superstitions in order to comment.
-
-
My questions are much simpler and are not meant to cause an argument but more to solicit opinion. First, what is artificial intelligence? Is the intelligence phony? Can it learn? The intelligence is real, and it can learn. Ok, next question, do we have the right to create a new species? One that is self aware and capable of learning? Who is going to teach it? And is consciousness realized when awareness happens? This is tricky because a toy robot proved it was aware of itself. So, these things that I have questioned are happening now. Do we have the right? What happens 50 years down the road when what we create no longer wishes to be around us? Technology is a good thing. To much technology can lead to our downfall. Peace ✌️