God does exist.

Exactly. I would apply the term AI to a program that reproduces intelligent behavior, but is limited to it's programming. In this sense, it cannot learn, it does not have true intelligence, but it does exhibit some intelligent traits. This would explain most current computer software. Even a caculator posesses artificial intelligence, because it performs a trait of intelligence (mathematics) but is limited to it's programming (so it can never exploit real intelligence, which is self-awareness and the ability to learn and adapt).

That's how I see it anyway.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

kidsun,

Welcome to sciforums.

Unless there is no god or spirit then all we have is science. And since we know that science exists but on one knows if gods or spirits exist then I would assume for now that all we have is science.

And for many the scientific discovery of energy allowed them to dismiss the magical superstitions of spirit forever.

Or perhaps it is just chemistry obeying the laws of physics.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

hello cris. thank you for your welcome.

yes, scientific understanding pulls the curtian back on any magician. maybe we're defining "spirit" differently. i spent a long time pursuing scientific answers to life's questions, and very little time in church. as a result, i ended up understanding "spirit" through words used in science, rather than through the words used to label religious terms.

believing in any "God" is seen by many in this age of reason as ignorant. so, think of me as ignorant if you will. i can only say that moving from an existential perspective to a transcendental one has improved my life immensely.

it is not just "chemistry obeying the laws of physics" (ie, science).
it is also the emotional experience of those laws manifesting themselves. we can't get reliable, valid measures of subjective, emotional experiences.

just because we can't measure something
doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

spirit --> science --> spirit

"because the world is round it turns me on."





just

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think that as we create better and better AI, the chances are good that humans will just adapt the definition of what is "alive" or "intelligent" so that we don't un into ethical problems when destroying computers. We aren't creating computers that evolve, or robots that grow are we? So what if we do succeed in creating life. Would we dare to control it? What if we could create something even more worthy of life than we are, unable to murder or hate - we programme them with a limited freedom and they will never know it. What if some sociopathic human then came and showed them what hate and murder looked like? They will instantly have that knowledge.

Think about it. We would be devils in their eyes. To prove that our love for our creations are equal to our love for our fellow humans, we would have to sacrifice ourselves so that they might have freedom to be what we created them to be. Would you do that? Would you love the intelligence you created with all the love you are capable of? Would you expect your creation to love you back if you gave them that option?

 

Jenyar,

Maybe, but I think the boundaries are going to be very blurred.

Yes very likely. In the same way that you are likely to upgrade your PC over time then an independent AI robot will very likely take advantages of upgrades to increase its capabilities.

I suspect that we will not have that level of control. When we do create true machine intelligence that is self-aware then it will quickly be able to reason for itself and determine the concepts of hate and murder. The nature of AI must include a learning mechanism and the ability to adapt itself based on what it learns, that is what we do. If we create equals or something superior then any initial conditions will be replaced automatically and very quickly as it learns for itself.

Perhaps I’m tired but I couldn’t following your hypothetical here. I think that AI will quickly exceed our capabilities and the only way we can effectively safeguard ourselves and compete on equal terms would be to convert and upgrade ourselves into their format. But that drifts into my pet subject of minduploading.

Perhaps it is worth noting that on 6/Dec/2002 IBM announced its design for Blue Gene. This a computer that will equal the power of 1 million current high end desktop PCs. The expected completion date is 2007 and this will be around 10 years ahead of what Moore’s law predicts. This computer alone will exceed the processing power of the human brain.

 

Marc AC:

"Why would He leave us the Bible, which is replete with examples of His love and care, love can be harsh at times"

First of all, we don't have any proof that GOD left the bible. And if he DID, then why would he confuse us by writing about "creation" in the super-vauge/super-incorrect version of genesis? And those "replete" examples only show what you like to think is love and care. Might I also Reitterate by saying that "goodness" is COMPLETELY up to opinion. Please PLEASE don't give opinions. "God is good" is not fact, it is opinion. The greater good of what anyway? The greater good of us? Why would he care?

"Would you rather He didn't create us? "

That is irrelevant. The question still stands: "why did god create us?"

"The purpose of God's entire creation is to serve Him "

He doesn't need humans to serve him, he can do that by himself using his "unlimited powers"...

"He helps us to serve Him due to our imperfect nature. "

I think you screwed up somewhere in that sentence.

"It makes sense to many others - in other words they understand it."

No, in other words they don't care if they understand it or not, they just accept it with there "faith".

"He cares because He knows that to 'bow our heads in front of him' means to follow a 'path' to a better existence. "

Once again, Better, good, bad, evil, improve are all opinion words unless you use them correctly (which you are not doing). Knives are better for killing people than wood is not an opinion, Knives are better IS. Opinions do not help the argument.

"When we don't believe in Him we use our freewill to '[****] ourselves up'."

And THIS is why he sends us to hell? Thats stupid. We punish criminals then release them to try and show them what will happen to them if they do it again. We punish criminals and keep them there indefinately to try and show other potential criminals what would happen to them. If we are sent to hell, noone knows about it so it serves no purpose to god or us.

 

Guess it ididn't...

Originally posted by French
And THIS is why he sends us to hell? Thats stupid. We punish criminals then release them to try and show them what will happen to them if they do it again. We punish criminals and keep them there indefinately to try and show other potential criminals what would happen to them. If we are sent to hell, noone knows about it so it serves no purpose to god or us.
Well from a Christian point of view, everyone who is not in hell is in heaven, and when you get to heaven you will know, because it will be completely different from our present physical world. No Sun or Moon etc. (All in Revelations). Now on the concept of Hell. Yes, it is quite difficult to percieve God as all loving if He would subject you to eternal punishment. But what if it was all for your good (if you suffer in hell). I was reading of late an exegetical and somewhat scientific analysis of the idea of hell (Beyond the Cosmos by Ross Hugh). It could be that if God doesn't subject those in hell to the punishment, then they might make things worse for everyone in hell - wherever it is or will be. It is like you keeping a criminal locked up so that he will not be a menace to society, as you know what He is capable of (this would be the agonising punishment part of it). Also, whoever goes to hell chooses to go there, like some here they want nothing to do with God, and God acknowledges that and sends them somwhere where they can be with as many atheists and agnostics and criminals and idiots as they wish (hell - an existence without God's positive influences). Don't ask French - this world is under God's positive influence even if you don't know it. If not, evil and athesim would have already taken over the world. Anyway, if you don't understand tell me. Lata.

 

In my opinion, goodness isn't all up to opinion. Goodness is defined by God, just as love is. You might have a problem with identifying what love is, many people do, and yet many people don't. A smart, person, Cris, for example, would assume that the men who wrote the Bible back then were limited in vocabulary, and this notion has been exhausted on this forum.

On the contrary it is quite relevant. But let me ask you a similar question, on your turf; Why do we exist? You see the relevance of my 'counter-question'?

That is impractical. A.I. will one day be asking why did you create us?

You thought wrong. If you are a professor who requests the assistance of sophomore to teach some undergrads you can help him/her out with a few pointers right? {Like God giving us the Bible and the Holy Spirit} Humans are inclined to sin > When we sin we don't serve God > God sends the Bible and the Holy Spirit to guide us along. What don't you understand within it?

So what is the correct way to use them French - in your opinion?

 

I am aware of eternity, yet I cannot comprehend it,
I am aware of love, yet I do not fully understand it.
I am aware of eternity, and I am aware of love,
and I know that these two things are the same.

also...

All the reliogions of the world, and all of the scientific communities,
all agree on the same thing...
the Creation.

let there be light, and so came the big bang...


if you have ever known love, than you know of your soul


the above quotes from "Armand"

 

Maybe God exists, maybe He deosn't.

 

God is a man with allot of tolerance. Why people set his cross on fire everyday, but dose he shock them down? nope.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This is known as the argument from ignorance.

Let me get this straight, you do not comprehend either of these things yet you "know" that they are the same?

No, they don't.

~Raithere

 

Re: Looks like this is it...

I don't think God can be deduced to exist.

 

Fuck. Will this thread not die?

 

Re: Re: Looks like this is it...

You are correct. God can not be reasonably deduced. Of course a determined theist (who is actually interested in debate and doesn't immediately resort to dogma (which is RARE from my experience)) would argue about one's definition of "reasonable". I'd say mine would be "a conclusion reached through the use of reason" and then further define reason as something to do with "logical assumptions" or something. You probably get the point (you probably already knew it, pardon.. I have two cents).

 

I hope god dose not exsist because I hate the thought of there being one central ruler who controls everything - even if he dose treat us fairly, it's just not right in my opinion. We where not asked to be brought into this world and now the exsistance of god is being shoved upon us? Now we must obey a single person for the rest of our lives and all eternity??!?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

80 pages....

 

lol, this is a good thread man! Chill out, have som :m: !

 

Personally, i don't know if this has been posted before in this thread, and personally, i don't care. Speaking of personally, this is my personal reason why god is a contradiction to himself, and as such imperfect, and non-existent. God, as defined, is the supremely powerful being, who exists in the faith of the masses, and has no power, otehr then that which man gives them over himself (sorry ladies, our race is defined manly). Anywho, based on this pure faith believance, wouldn't an existence based on faith, be totally debased if someone came along, and proved there was a way to infer the existence of a god? Wouldn't the miracles performed by such be direct evience for the god? Any miracle could be explained as a peculurarity of the human existence, why? Humans as a speicies are very under understood, we dont know our own capabilities, so we dont know the extent of how we can manipulate our own bodies, and those of others. Phenomenon such as the bleeding at the areas where christ bled, hands and feet, are easily influenced, stigmata is what its called i believe, and this stigmata is controled by, the location at least, where in the stain glass the holes are. Say two churches each have one member that expieriences stigmata, on one stain glass the holes are through the wrist (the proper place for the holes), and on the other, its thru the hands. Each case of stigmata will occur in accordance with their particular stain glass. What does this show? that its not controlled by some mystical force, its controled by a human being, their own subconcious.I had a point, which is god doesnt exist int he mystical sense, well i havn't stayed with this point, but i got it accross mildly well. What i will admit to is that each person can, and some do, have their own personal god, which the use to control their lives within the limits of society, anyways, this has been another rant by yours truly, fafnir, night all

 

Many of the people who explore the deepest secrets see things they can't explian, and this is how they retionalize thier belief in god