We are at an interesting point where now we're saying that the boolean logic of transistors can't do logic. Only a while ago we were saying that the rigid boole

We are at an interesting point where now we're saying that the boolean logic of transistors can't do logic. Only a while ago we were saying that the rigid boolean logic of transistors couldn't do what large models are now doing. I predict that it is only a matter of time (not even all that long) before we have models that hypothesize logical invariants and disprove them or possibly formulate proofs. The distinction about having a soul or not--what is the purported pragmatic advantages of having a soul that contributes to intelligence? I haven't thought about it much but I think of a few things: (a) my memories/sentiments surviving physical demise and somehow thinking/feeling again, (b) an existence beyond our physical world which doesn't contribute to intelligence in and of itself, (c) some sort of hive mind/collective which unless isn't bound by the speed of light isn't that different than interconnecting processes. When we say "general intelligence" do we really mean "be human" which is not interesting. Why is having a soul assuming humans do, an impasse for AGIs? As far as I can tell it's only about preserving some (pragmatic) aspect of human > machine. This has fallen in area after area and will continue to happen until we quietly drop the preconceived notion.