3 ms·
I will make a prediction here that Dawkins will believe AI is conscious since it pushes forward his arguments for atheism. There’s no difference between soulles
by manoDev 5mo ago
I will make a prediction here that Dawkins will believe AI is conscious since it pushes forward his arguments for atheism. There’s no difference between soulless humans and conscious machines.
There’s a trap though: since we invented AI, and if AI is conscious, would we be their gods? I wonder what Dawkins thinks about that.
- gehwartzen 5mo agoMakes you wonder who our gods are ;)
- Shadowmist 5mo agoDon’t Touch My Ladder
- legacynl 5mo agoIt's turtles all the way down.
- 10xDev 5mo agoNo even that is giving too much credit. It is no longer cool or edgy to be an atheist and trend is shifting the other way for young people. Just another fraud, no integrity. This should have been obvious when they all suddenly came on podcasts talking about simulation theory as if that's not just another way of saying we have been created by something but with a sci-fi-esque twist.
- grantcas 5mo ago[dead]
- ineedasername 5mo agoWhat's the trap? You're either deciding that the concept "god-of" is baked into the concept of being the inventor of something, or you decide that it isn't baked-in. Doing this is just book keeping in the ledgers of the lexicon, but doesn't get you anywhere new, though it does then impose the need for some new words so that you can meaningfully and coherently have conversations about the concept of something that has has the metaphysical properties commonly ascribed to things you'd previously been referring to with the 'god' entry from the lexicon, but is now orphaned from the lexigraph layer.