Spiritual machines?

[Guest]

Hello!

Creating a robot with self-awareness is impossible in principle. However, creating a robot with the appearance of self-awareness is possible in principle. ... our brains are more than the sum of its components. It's a great mystery, but somewhere in our brains is the "metaphysical self" which transcends the physical brain. ... Rather this "self" is so integrated with the brain as to be inseparable. Man can never impart such a self to a robot.

I've known some humans who exhibit only the appearance of self-awareness.

But seriously - I disagree with your "metaphysical" assertion (which cannot be verified or refuted, of course). I see humans as animated, structured physical matter. There is no essential reason that the structural pattern for an intelligent, self-aware being cannot be duplicated and animated.

Shalom,
Emmet

[Guest]

There is no essential reason that the structural pattern for an intelligent, self-aware being cannot be duplicated and animated.

Perhaps science will allow for the possibility, but I'm uncomfortable with your statement, nonetheless. Wouldn't that give humans god-like ability that God Himself has not given us? And isn't grabbing for what God does not choose to give us what caused our fallen states to begin with?

TK, I don't see, at first glance, any reason to wonder why a cloned human being wouldn't have a soul or a sin nature. After all, a clone is simply someone with identical DNA to someone else, and isn't that all twins are also?

[Guest]

Atheist, Your question is not so far fetched in that we as humans attach ouselves and emotions to man made things. One for example is this computer, but we must all deal with the reality that such things are only man made and temporary. To attach ones emotions to such would be foolish. Yet we all do it from time to time.

[Guest]

RO-- Good point about identical twins, but twins have a mother and father. a clone would be an exact copy of someone else, i.e. it can be asexual. if sin is passed thru adam's line, what if it's a female clone? i know this seems like a strange discussion.

at one time i thought that perhaps the Antichrist (assuming him to be a literal person, although my views have changed) might be a clone. i'm not sure why i thought that, i just did.


TK

[Guest]

Gals and guys,

Thanks for your replies but I think you're missing the ball slightly.

Paidion was correct in stating that we can never know if such creatures really have this unique sense of "Self" inside them or are just very good lifeless emulators of human behaviour, emotions etc. And here lies the core of the problem, guys! Imagine those machines (say humanoid things which look like Asimo) live among you, make you laugh, cry, play and work with you. You'll be pressed to decide if they are "equal" of humans or somehow "lesser" beings because they are man-made or factory-made. How would you approach the dilemma as Christians? Remember, there is no objective, reliable test to determine if something is conscoius and has a mind of its own or not. All you can go by is its responses to your questions and actions. Asking it "are you conscious" solves nothing, obviously. Think about this.



Paidion,
I'd like to point out you're slightly wrong that the a naturalistic worldview implies causal determinism. Recall the Heisenberg Uncertainty Priniciple. The Universe at its very core is not wound up and predetermined. There is uncertainty woven into the very fabric of reality through all the Quantum Mechanics phenomena that we register. Therefore even 100% artificial machines cannot be said to be 100% deterministic.

[Guest]

Atheist,

What if these machines resembled dogs and they communicated to us by 'barking.' The machine experts claimed that the dogs had consciousness and claimed to have feelings.

Now, suppose that these machines wanted to have equal rights with humans. Would you grant it to them?

I guess I'm wondering if you take away the humanoid appearance and ability to communicate, what is the difference?

Another question would be, if the same is true for dogs (the ones around today), would you grant them equal rights? (It seems that some animal rights activists do!)

Just so you know, my post is serious.

Thanks.
Les

Jim - an aside.. I am not sure that Gen 11:6 proves that humans are literally only limited by their imagination, unless of course time travel is possible?

[Guest]

Les,
I'm actually on the fence on whether a biological dog is fully "conscious" in the sense that we humans understand the word. Therefore I'm not in favour of granting dogs human rights nor would I be in favour of grantnig electronic dogs human rights. Though I guess I'd be fine with granting them doggie rights ie. no cruelty etc.

But the issue of human-like entities is quite different though. We recognize that we're all conscious because we respond to spoken and body language in very similar ways.

Humans actually tend to think less of people who are unable to communicate. This is documented in the societal treatment of feral children.

Human language communication is our main determinant of whether the other side is also "human". Thus I think the posited dilemma is very relevant in regards to machines with a human level of intelligence but not so important regarding machines with say a dog's level of comprehension. Thus my original questions stand.

I hope this answers your question.

Finally, let me point you all to this linK:

http://world.honda.com/HDTV/ASIMO/New-A ... ding-tray/ (Warning: large download if you are not on a broadband connection)

It's a demo of Asimo carrying a coffee tray. So yeah, robots are hardly a match for humans today. You can brush it off as a nerd's gimmick.

Today.

But technological progress is exponential and I assure you that if you're 30 or 40 today, then likely within your own lifetime you'll have to answer to yourself the very questions that I aked in the beginning of this thread. And they will no longer be hypothetical pie-in-the-sky sci-fi deliberations. They will be questions pertaining to laws being crafted, societal standards etc. This stuff is happening and it will creep upon us in the forseeable future.

[Guest]

If the machine has a short circuit and blows a fuse are we morally obligated to fix it? If we don't like it (say it was like Hitler) do we have to "resuscitate" it? Would it be OK to smash it rather than fix it? After all, it could be put away in a box for 100 years and some one might come along and "resurrect" it!

You folks have fun with this one!

[Guest]

Consider this: Imagine that humans at some point are able to build machines that are intellectually and emotionally equals (or even superior) of humans i.e. we can't recognize their behaviour as in any way "automatic" or "preprogrammed". They pass the Turing test with flying colors, have motor capabilities comparable to us, etc. etc.

Now, imagine such machines start to claim having feelings, emotions and maybe even spirituality.

My question to you is this: how would you treat such machines?

Is this before or after extraterrestrials make contact with mankind?

The premise is both flawed and highly implausible (despite what Kurzweil et al may think), because it reduces all that makes a human down to matter and computation. In other words, it assumes that humans are machines and, therefore, machines can become humans. I don't buy the assumption.

[Guest]

Mort_Coyle,

If the future however, does run contrary to your prediction will you think less of religion or will you remain sceptical about the cognition of those machines?