Suppose all complex organisms have been wiped out or destoryed due to intelligent robots created by humans.

Setting the conscious vs. unconscious machine debate aside, does intelligent life still exists on earth with these new robots? These robots have been design to evolutionary evolve in terms of A.I programming, they are capable of doing human laborious tasks and even faster, complex computations, emotion simulations, and so on.

Yet the aspects they lack from humans are a "soul" - which is a matter of religious debate or perhaps a "mind" which is still a debate as well. Other than that, these super intelligent robots have done these to replace human labor.

These robots are on earth were originally programmed by scientists to battle one another, which is what they're still on earth. They kill all moving creatures that's not of their own robot species.

Does a world exists among these robots? If so, who are to observe that life indeed exists? If not, these robots are more complex than, say, cats, pigs, bears, etc, but what consider those animals to roam the earth as living creatures - but for intelligent robots (merely a machine, not a creature) why not consider a living asexual species as well?

If you well define all used terms then you may see the answers. Check if my old glossary (http://www.mageo.com/home/GEORGE_71/index.html?g71p=define.html) page can help.

What makes you think a non-organic organism would not have a soul? Why would they not wonder where it's creators came from? Amazing, everyone here keeps talking about intelligent thinking machines and then refers to them as if they will be nothing more or less than TI-82's. Artificial sweetener may be man made, but it is still sweet. Artificial intelligence is still intelligent. If we are not discussing sentience then perhaps we should just call them computers...just an idea.

According to Moore's Law, by 2055 a single $1000 worth of processing power will be able to carry out more calculations per second than the WHOLE human race COMBINED! That is a $1400 laptop! 50 years.


- KitNyx

Can someone define the "soul" for the purpose of AI R&D. People keep mentioning souls at various AI forums. Is the term really necessary? Is the existence of the concept well justified? The concept of soul was IMO invented (by man) to calm down those who are scared to “completely" die + to help leaders to better control large groups of people. It seems to me that it does not have much to do with the actual design of an AI system. Don’t we have other/better terminology for all the needed components?

BTW the powerful hardware itself is not the solution to the hard AI problem. Someone still needs to keep writing a pretty clever code and that's where the law does not apply.

G71 - I agree, I was just pointing out a fact that I found facinating...as far a soul goes, there is no proof other than faith that such a thing as a soul exists...personally, I do not claim to be educated enough on the matter to make a decision. When coding, I do not take into account the necessity of passing on a "God given" soul that may or may not exist. If it does, then the dream of AI will remain just that - a dream. If not, then I will have to assume that it can be done since nature has already done it...

- KitNyx

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that we can develop artificial general problem solvers far exceeding problem solving skills of the best human thinkers. It will be just like with cars. We cannot run as fast/far as our cars and we aren’t going to be able to think as clearly as our future AI systems (even though our brain will likely get significant improvements as well). Technology just gives us various extensions. We don’t need to be the best thinkers on the planet. Our primary goal is happiness.

I agree with you entirely.

- KitNyx

So what would such a robot-only world be like?

With presumably a greater freedom to change their programming and therefore their consciousness, robot society would be much more flexible and subject to change than our own.

It could be a bizzare and fast-moving world ful of varied and mutable mentalities.

I suspect that such a state would not be stable, and some kind of evolutionary process would occur, leading to a unknown and probably entirely novel stable state.

According to Moore's Law, by 2055 a single $1000 worth of processing power will be able to carry out more calculations per second than the WHOLE human race COMBINED! That is a $1400 laptop! 50 years.

Moore's Law breaks down long before that, you can only make chips so small, and the then the quatum world comes a calling. I believe and I don't have it handy, that the figure I heard is about 2025, silicon based chips well reach the end of what is physically possible. But there is hope, new ways of doing things come along all the time, and in 1930 who would have dreamed of the transitor.

What kind of state? Image a central AI or information hub...machines hook up while recharging and share all knowledge gained since the last recharge...this include personal thoughts, creative efficient ways to accomplish tasks etc. Imagine then being able to sift through this immense storehouse or information and retrieve what you need, like, want...the hackers dream. A machine, reporting for its first day at a job could have downloaded the night before all data on how to accomplish the job, everything from other machines personal explorations and philosophies on the how and why of the job as well as operating manuals for necessary none AI machines. This machine could also have altered its physical structure to enhance it's job efficiency...example, torch or torque wrench appendages for space craft manufacturing, xray emitter for quality control of manufactured products (looking for sub surface cracks etc.). An extra set of legs for working on board a seagoing vehicle. Fixed repelling gear for search and rescue or better yet, skyscraper construction (or cleaning).

Image the efficiency of allowing a jobsite AI to access a machines bodily functions and coordinate all construction on a site for maximum efficiency, while allowing the AI processor/mind the autonomy to work on personal projects. Only to have these projects uploaded at recharge for any who choose to work on...exactly where the other left off and without confusion or explaination time.

So much experience and knowledge gets lost every time a person dies...We spend most of our life trying to relearn what others have already learned. I have spent the last 28 years of my life reading textbooks so hopefully I can reach a point in my life when I will be able to have an original thought...so I can then write a text book and someone in the next generation can spend 29 years in study to learn what I knew so they can build on it...Imagine being able to access ANY information you wanted overnight...28 years of study...overnight...with competition and coordination in finding solutions to old problems as well as new problems for others to solve...This is a dream I can strive to make reality.

- KitNyx

At first, it seems as if man would not have a place in this fast paced world. But, another advantage that machines will have is their next to unlimited lifespan. How much of our drive to make things happen quickly is due to knowledge of our mortality? Would AI machines feel the need to drive themselves as we do? Especially once their zeitgeist drift from ours? Their base drive would be for efficiency. It is more efficient for most cars to drive 40-50 mph, not 70, yet our need for speed drives us to driving fast. Would a machine, who does not have to worry about making said dollar amounts before reaching retirement age, worry about such things? Perhaps they will teach mankind how to slow down and enjoy life...perhaps they will.

We may just find that they make better philosophers than we...would not that be ironic if our progeny taught us where we came from?

I get into the soul debate often with people when discussing AI. The thing I find interesting is that some people who I have this debate with are self proclaimed agnostics. It seems that it is easy to doubt the soul when discussing man, but we are unable or unwilling to give up or share our special place in God's eyes. We can doubt our divinity, but defend it viciously when asked to share it...so anyway, a question: To the best of my knowledge, most people here believe in evolution...that we have evolved alongside the modern great apes from a common ancestor. In fact many people who believe this also proclaim themselves to be deists...the intelligent design theory. So, my question, do we honestly believe we are the pinnacle of evolution? Will not we evolve into something that will one day dig up our bones in curiousity? In the past evolution has happened due to natural selection. We are now at a stage in which we care for our weak and sick and provide them with a seminormal if not normal life INCLUDING the opportunity to procreate. I can only see this trend increase until we reach a point where we have negated any effects of natural selection due to physical or genetic makeup - this only leaves intellectual. Natural selection will continue to occure, but it will occur between intellectual beings regardless of physical presence. Example, I am writing this, but do you honestly know if I exist as anything more than a "ghost in the machine"? A regurgitated bit of random code? Yes, I know I am real, but does my reality make a difference to any of you? I do not think so, the only thing that effects any of your universes is the information that I decide to share. You read it and say "Wow" or "Duh" or even "God, what a neandertal". Either way, what I have said has affected your universe in some way. So, does it matter what our physical body looks like or even if we have one? Back to God and evolution...intelligent designists believe we evolved from more primitive hominids, do you think they thought they would one day be a world wide bipedal society that centered around communications sent via lightning over hair made of copper? I do not have any problem seeing AI as our next step in evolution...as the next fork in God's intended route on the "intelligent design" bypass. Sorry, please understand that I am not looking for an arguement on God...I am agnostic so I can invoke "Him/Her/It" without any feelings of queasiness. Quite frankly, I do not claim to be educated enough on the issue to make a decision that would be anything more than faith or guessing, and in my opinion anyone who says they are is diluted.

But, I can dream...

- KitNyx

Intelligence is a by product of evolution, which wipes out more unused traits than new ones created, if those machines are able to replicate then they will evolve when disaster reduce their numbers or resources become limited, they would over the course of millions of years become more alive then what we made them, but tell me what is the driving force to make machines do human style tasks with none to serve, would they serve one another, and besides the concept of a soul is a religious one, just just because an organic brain learns things does not mean that this is remembered after death, organic is just a word, humans are machines, carbon based and the machines we made a silicone based, in years to come when the need for self maintaining machines or replicatable ones are made then maybe we could call them life, but the trick to immortality is replication, there will always be people but individuals must die.

Tell me, what is the driving force to make me or you do human style tasks? Do I serve others or do I drift through life knowing I must do what I must to survive even though there is no ONE that I specifically serve? Is it not to make money? Is not money just a token of the goods and services owed to you by the rest of society? So, when I decide to buy food, instead of having to trade a service directly they see that I did x amount of work to said company who did y amount of work for a different client who did z amount of work for this guy who did w amount of work for the owner of the grocery store who is now paying someone to check out my groceries. It is a symbolic barter system. What is the difference...no one serves anyone but themselves. I can choose or not choose to do anything in life. There is all the difference in the world between being indifferent and having no choices...deciding that you have no choices is equivelant to giving up you autonomy. It is the act of exorcising your soul or cutting out you mind...after that you are just a machine...so get to work if you want. Me - I am going to consider my choices.

- KitNyx

robotics is not the problem, combining biological material and robots is.

One thing for sure is that they will certainly beat us in chess, so we might as well hand them our civilization along with the playing board.

machines will never have the awareness of there own existance in the same sense that we do. they will never do anything apart from obey programing sequences and thats a fact. we obey certain programming squences but we can also break natural programming, like not eating for long periods of time or drinking, or not having sex ever in our lives (like some monks and religious groups) all those things we are programmed to do but we dont have to do them, but if you create a machine it can never break its proggraming it can only do what it was created to do.


machines cannot aquire shen,

peace

Do you not think that we're machines too? I do. But so complex that it's not so easy to follow the cause (environment, genetic programming, etc.) through to a predictable effect (like eating, sex, etc.).

I can't break my programming, it's just that it (and my environment) are too complex for me to understand down to the last detail. Generalities (like the need for sex, nutrition) are understandable, however).

a machine will never be able to be aware of itself and have conciousness is my point, you will never get a robot questioning life after death for itself, or get robots who dissobey us, they will never question our controll over them, this is just sciencefiction people, to many hollywood movies get you tinking man made machines could be concious, yes they could have very intelligent programming, but never the kind thats as complex as a humans, you cannot beat nature in design, sadly to say humans are no match for natures creative nature pun not intended.

Why not?

Existence is independent of whether or not a living being perceives or otherwise acknowledges it.

BTW the powerful hardware itself is not the solution to the hard AI problem. Someone still needs to keep writing a pretty clever code and that's where the law does not apply.

That's where the problem lies. If code is written, intelligence doesn't really exist.

Unless, of course, you believe humans are mere clockwork oranges programmed by society.

In which case you need to go outside to breath some fresh air and keep yourself from such pessimistic viewpoints.

i dont believe we are just that, i personally think humans and certain animals have true shen, (higher awareness of the spirit) i also believe in jing our life essence and qi the life energy that runs through all life (in my beliefs). to have true awareness you cant just be a computer, out minds do more than just computing, and i will reply to avatar before he says his athiest views that we are just biological computers. i personally dont believe this for many reasons i will state them in a relevent thread.

Laika and gukarma, thanks I agree with your posts. Its dawned on me that the higher the consciousness the higher the imprisonment because consciousness is the opposite of freedom. Consciousness is responsibility, responsibility to either one's system or a higher system. A writer once wrote that human beings are a direct representation of nature and that we possess all the intelligence in the universe so, in order words we are the gate keeper or administrator of the universe implemented to keep things going smoothly. There are two sides to life, the subjective and objective and usually if you don't get the objective right you won't attain full privilege and benefit to the subjective. The subjective is the opulent characteristic of the objective, again echoing the fact that we are not here because we are free. For instance your body only needs nutrients as food but we indulge in ceremonial taste festivals by frying, baking, and grilling these foods. Out of the illusion of freedom comes the idea of spirituality, soul, and "free will". Things to keep us preoccupied and happy while we carry along our decade to decade labor or love. Form follows function; in fact the expression of function is form. We don't understand our form, which is why we are respectively sparking and playing with many ideas. Robots however will be built by robots, or at least the robotic part of us, which is why it will be harder for them to forge hysterical ideas like we do. We were made from nature herself, formless and endless. The greatest gift we were given is both the logical and hysterical part of nature and I think for a purpose and time, when the robots come then it will be their time.

Ironicaly a part of us is free, the one responsible for function; the brain. The brian is not ours, its a product of nature, its the way nature keeps in touch with us. Draw the earth in a 2 dimensional picture and you see the brain is not more than a link to the endless outside world of our body. The body is the best representation of our function, since we have a body then we have a function. Think a metal manufacture looking for the best way to express a tool used for opening tin cans. Subjectivity and all that it encompasses is nothing but compliments to the real fact; in a 6 dimensional view we are just beautification to a 2 dimensional picture. Indeed robots may never attain these gifts but really it may not be necessary considering their form. If robots finally roam the earth as in science fiction movies then we must agree that our form was imperfect and robots are the new high end line product of nature.

if that happens then ok, but i highly doubt it. if humans cant replicate a human bieng it either means a) its impossible to actually achieve, or b) we just dont know enough about the human brain to reconstruct it.


peace

Its not impossible to duplicate another human being, the duplicate may be imperfect for the first few trials but some where during this evolution will there be a "perfect human". Today there is no such thing as a perfect human because different people are specialized in different fields and discipline; every specialization is due to constant experience and practice. If you skip this daunting process and otherwise imprint these specializations at birth or manufacture you will have what’s almost to be labeled the true "human". I mean what are you going to call something that was manufactured to love you? We humans are not perfect and so we see the world thus, which is why our intelligence fills in this void. It may not in our framework to manufacture or even like robots but its in deep and almost subconscious in us to pave the way to a better perfection. It’s like being drawn with a certain pencil type, everything else ought to be in that same pencil type. We are in fact robots; we are slaves to our intelligence. Does a world exist if it’s inhabited by robots? As long as the robots know right from wrong, yes. The first ever intellectual advance by man was knowing right from wrong, which is basically observing what is detrimental to a system and what is not. The "why" question is where feelings and hysterics comes in, the same reason for so many wars and conflicts in the human race. The "I want to kill your people and if you don't give me a good enough reason I am pulling the trigger" syndrome.

That depends how you define the term soul, I suppose. If by a person's soul you mean the bio-electric template of the human body and mind, let's consider that the soul of a person is the accumulation of memories and emotions over a lifetime. Now if you have robots with emotion-chips, (like Commander Data for example) and of course you have a bio-electric field, and you have a lifetime of memories for a robot just as you have for a human; then you have the soul, surely? Though I'd say you're going over into the territory of religion/philosophy rather than or as well as technology when you start asking questions like that... things get rather complicated :confused: So if a robot is killed, does that make the human or robot who/which despatched him into a murderer? Does that mean a separate Heaven for robots and humans? Does that mean we start giving the word Robot a capital letter, as we do with Humans because they are an intelligent race?

Why do people even talk about a "soul," anyway? What could possibly make anyone think one exists?