4 ms·

It would be really interesting to read a theologians view of AI, maybe a question for Google's Vatican office (if there were one)? The problem with that view i

It would be really interesting to read a theologians view of AI, maybe a question for Google's Vatican office (if there were one)? The problem with that view is that when you dig into it, it’s always a permutation of, “God did it,” or “Because God said so.” There isn’t much to work with there, and you can use it to justify literally anything at all because it’s free from the constraints of logic. You could equally argue that a machine can never have a soul, and no consciousness, or that god could just decree it does, and who’s to really say otherwise? There is no there, there.

whatshisface 8y ago
They're implying that when you involve God you'll also pick up the Roman Catholic catechism. The real problem with trying to bring religion in to these debates comes from trying to pick the religion! Nonspecific God is actually the same as atheism for the reason you point out - you can't make any prior statements about what God will do, which is the same as not being able to make any prior statements about what Nature will do. Physicists have historically interchanged God and Nature (casually, they aren't trying to say anything) when they're talking, and it works for this reason.
- cfadvan 8y ago
  Exactly. At the end of the day science is all about “How” although some scientists being human, understandably do sometimes wade into the “Why” end of it. Science is great at delving into how something works, without bothering with a “why” and nowhere is that better expressed than in Langrangian formulations. When people try to inject Why into science, they’re missing the point, and the same is true of trying to inject How into religion.
  - monktastic1 8y ago
    It's also possible that there is a meaningful "why." From the perspective of mystical traditions, apparently physical reality is an expression of God's mind. Why God is having this particular dream can then be answered meaningfully, by entering into direct gnosis -- because you are, after all, Him. The hard part is testing this objectively. In a lucid dream, you might understand why the Dreamer is generating this particular setup, but until you can demonstrate it to the satisfaction of others in the dream, it's not very useful to them.
    - cfadvan 8y ago
      It’s possible that there is a god or something similar, but it’s not possible, as you say, to test it (at least not in the foreseeable future) in a meaningful way. We just don’t know, and have no way or knowing. Anyone can float a view from dreaming gods, through gnostic concepts, to simulated reality, and we have no evidence for or against and no real hope of finding such evidence.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]

whatshisface 8y ago

They're implying that when you involve God you'll also pick up the Roman Catholic catechism. The real problem with trying to bring religion in to these debates comes from trying to pick the religion! Nonspecific God is actually the same as atheism for the reason you point out - you can't make any prior statements about what God will do, which is the same as not being able to make any prior statements about what Nature will do. Physicists have historically interchanged God and Nature (casually, they aren't trying to say anything) when they're talking, and it works for this reason.

cfadvan 8y ago
Exactly. At the end of the day science is all about “How” although some scientists being human, understandably do sometimes wade into the “Why” end of it. Science is great at delving into how something works, without bothering with a “why” and nowhere is that better expressed than in Langrangian formulations. When people try to inject Why into science, they’re missing the point, and the same is true of trying to inject How into religion.
- monktastic1 8y ago
  It's also possible that there is a meaningful "why." From the perspective of mystical traditions, apparently physical reality is an expression of God's mind. Why God is having this particular dream can then be answered meaningfully, by entering into direct gnosis -- because you are, after all, Him. The hard part is testing this objectively. In a lucid dream, you might understand why the Dreamer is generating this particular setup, but until you can demonstrate it to the satisfaction of others in the dream, it's not very useful to them.
  - cfadvan 8y ago
    It’s possible that there is a god or something similar, but it’s not possible, as you say, to test it (at least not in the foreseeable future) in a meaningful way. We just don’t know, and have no way or knowing. Anyone can float a view from dreaming gods, through gnostic concepts, to simulated reality, and we have no evidence for or against and no real hope of finding such evidence.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]