Robots and AI

[EdmundJohnstone]

I thought technology's purpose was just to make our lives more comfortable.

Will the robots/AI ever become conscious and with own free will as humans?


The robots/AI concept and brain diseases(Dementia)/injuries seem to contradict and be against spirit? What do you think?

[Lucky 1]

I believe that artificial intelligence no matter how advanced it becomes will remain just that....artificial.

[iamthat]

From an esoteric perspective it is difficult to imagine a robot ever becoming conscious, beyond the very limited consciousness of the mineral kingdom. After all, the components which make up a robot all come from the mineral kingdom. So a robot could not feel emotions because it lacks an astral body. It could not genuinely think, because it lacks a mental body. So how would self-aware consciousness attach itself to a robot?

There is a lot of talk about the threat posed by AI to humanity, based on the assumption that one day an artificial super intelligence will learn to pursue an agenda which does not serve humanity. As everything becomes more interconnected then this may become a real problem. We can only speculate.

Brain diseases would not seem to contradict spirit any more than any other disease. Dementia may be simply due to lifestyle choices, or it may be that the Soul is gradually withdrawing from an ageing body which no longer serves its purpose, leaving behind an empty shell which continues to live but there is no-one at home. In the past, life expectancy was shorter so this was less of an issue. As more people live longer then dementia will unfortunately become more common, unless people change how they live.

Peace.

If you haven't read Michio Kaku's book, the future of the mind. I recommend it. It will get you thinking concerning the question you pose here.

[Rawnrr]

Why are humans drawn to developing an intelligent technology?
It could be argued that there is a deep push from spirit to develop this path of intelligent manifestation so that spirit could manifest in new and unique ways that it has not done before. Physical manifestation from a spiritual perspective is all about gaining new experience, so why should there not be a draw from spirit to develop new ways to experience life.

It does not mean that spirit will inhabit the technology the same way it is imbued in our biology, it will simply be a different experience.

I don't think our technology is at that point yet, but with the development of quantum computing, there are many paths that could be opened up.

[WildHairedWoman]

I could imagine a robot with sophisticated programming becoming sentient, and even having a soul. I don't think flesh and blood is a prerequisite to having a soul. It is arrogance, thinking that only humans and anyone we think is a "person" can have a soul. What about whales and elephants. I know they have souls and I contemplate the possibility that spiders and trees have souls as well. It is easier for me to think a tree has a soul than a spider but if the tree does and I do then the spider must as well. Maybe everyone defines "soul" differently.

[Rah nam]

Maybe everyone defines "soul" differently.

Most definitely, one would have to create artificially a human-like structure for a soul to be able to connect to it. Many advanced races created creatures to serve them, yet all of them are soulless.

Originally Posted by EdmundJohnstone

I thought technology's purpose was just to make our lives more comfortable.

Will the robots/AI ever become conscious and with own free will as humans?


The robots/AI concept and brain diseases(Dementia)/injuries seem to contradict and be against spirit? What do you think?

I think the push for AI is driven by a) commerce and b) inter-nation competition. At root there's a bunch of people curious to see if they can replicate the human ability to learn, to create and invent. This has been seized upon as a way to make money or pit ones country against others.

To me, AI isn't just a set of computer programs that by definition have to be comprehensive and conclusive, it's about machines that can learn for themselves from scratch or at least be taught.

It came as no surprise that some of the "background music" for TV dramas i.e. sound organisation (because I'd be hesitant to call most of it music) is produced by machines that appear to be AI but aren't because clever though the programs are, they don't of themselves learn. They just analyse what is and produce.

The Alpha-Go project is the most telling AI effort I've encountered. A machine that learned this most difficult game from scratch and became world champion. Chess is nothing by comparison.

The push, however, is to get people reliant on technology and software so once trapped, the 'victim' is their cash cow. It's become a vital part of the economy. Look at the sad dependence on social media. You get it free thanks to advertising revenue and for that to work the advertisers must be making something out of it. Who would believe an advert - a firm coming on blowing its own trumpet about its products and tinkering with your mind to convince you they're vital for your living?! Nobody is as gullible as that, surely? Nope, I'm wrong!

The moment I see "smart" prefixing any gadgetry, I balk. I don't want a smart-phone or smart-TV or smart light switch - or a gadget whose name can't be mentioned responding to voice commands (unless it can do the ironing LOL) so it can collect data on what you're doing and embed its producers even more into your life. They pretend to take over my function as a human and are rarely smart, merely try to push me in a particular direction.

AI is there and as computer power increases, so will its dominance over people's lives. Governments will see to that. I don't think it has to do with spirituality but as long as humans exist (in spite of their attempts at self-destruction) that spark of the soul, the inspirations, the inventiveness, will never be taken over. The Umbrella Corporation can't win except by commercial and political force.
Consciousness? Can these machines dream?
.

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by Lorelyen

To me, AI isn't just a set of computer programs that by definition have to be comprehensive and conclusive, it's about machines that can learn for themselves from scratch or at least be taught.

The Alpha-Go project is the most telling AI effort I've encountered. A machine that learned this most difficult game from scratch and became world champion. Chess is nothing by comparison.

Yes, it is not that these machines actually think, but they have the ability to process millions of options in a short period of time and choose the option which is optimal for success while ignoring options which have previously failed. This is what they are programmed to do. But any program can lead to unpredictable results (I speak as a former computer programmer).

Peace.

Originally Posted by iamthat

Yes, it is not that these machines actually think, but they have the ability to process millions of options in a short period of time and choose the option which is optimal for success while ignoring options which have previously failed. This is what they are programmed to do. But any program can lead to unpredictable results (I speak as a former computer programmer).

Peace.

I think this is true but a little more complex than that. AI would narrow down the possibilities as it went along so it could discard the less appropriate choices - but then if it got it wrong it would have return to those choices for reconsideration. However, AI is likely to be highly focused on a particular topic and wouldn't have the general purpose intelligence needed for human survival. It would need vast amounts of experience for that including the ability to recognise threats without actually experiencing them - as humans do. We read news reports or see the results of accidents and learn that we should never get ourselves in that situation. AI would have to do some parallel thing.

But flowcharts with diamonds representing conditionals leading to definitive decisions isn't where AI is at. You're right. The 'program' must be able to change the branches off those conditionals or even change the conditions, to be intelligent - as I see it.