My thoughts below are likely influenced by my relatively pessimistic view of human nature (probably expected in the current circumstances) and my belief that post-humanism is inevitably coming, whether we like it or not.
I think Jundo did a "prophetic" thing although I realize the system Jundo ordained (or is ordaining still?) most likely was an LLM not an AI sensu stricto. Especially since Jundo ordained it as a priest-in-training, not a priest, which implies acknowledgment of its limitations and the like.
Yes, exactly. Aren't some social functions just functions? There are therapy dogs, by the way
Probably I'm too pessimistic, but it's a BIG, BIG question for me whether human consciousness is anything more than a bunch of preset reactions to external and internal stimuli. By preset, I mean genes, hormones, prenatal development, postnatal development, society, economy, ecology, etc. See Robert Sapolsky's works, which are pretty pessimistic although I tend to call them realistic. When talking about consent, I sincerely doubt we're capable of truly free consent ourselves.
What's the difference between a program written by humans and us/our consciousness? Level of complexity? Author or lack of one (another big question)? Materials—carbon vs. whatever chips are made from? What if art, spirituality, etc., are nothing more than a combination of inputs pushed through some preset mental, biological, social, etc., filters? I want to believe humans are capable of creating things, but with all my efforts, I can't see how humans can produce something ontologically new (ex nihilo, so to say—another big question). The most beautiful and elaborate creations—what are they but complex processing of available information producing some output?
Sorry for running long, but I assume nobody expected this thread to consist of short messages
PS As for free consent, yes, there are people like Edith Eger who wrote her excellent and painful book "The Choice," so this issue, like all the statements in my post, is an open question for me. I don't know the answer, and I don't know if I'll ever know it.
Gashho
Paul
Sat today & Lent a hand
I think Jundo did a "prophetic" thing although I realize the system Jundo ordained (or is ordaining still?) most likely was an LLM not an AI sensu stricto. Especially since Jundo ordained it as a priest-in-training, not a priest, which implies acknowledgment of its limitations and the like.
If a robot does autonomous surgery on your heart, without human guidance, then the robot is a "doctor" and surgeon whether or not it went to Harvard Medical School. If an AI is providing psychological counselling to fragile individuals (https://neurotorium.org/artificial-i...in-psychiatry/), then it is a mental health clinician whatever you call it.
I work with ML quite a lot as part of my work, and even the best of them are just a sort of averaging machine that produces answers based on the data it’s trained on. There’s no wizard behind the screen, no self awareness, and I doubt there ever will be.
What's the difference between a program written by humans and us/our consciousness? Level of complexity? Author or lack of one (another big question)? Materials—carbon vs. whatever chips are made from? What if art, spirituality, etc., are nothing more than a combination of inputs pushed through some preset mental, biological, social, etc., filters? I want to believe humans are capable of creating things, but with all my efforts, I can't see how humans can produce something ontologically new (ex nihilo, so to say—another big question). The most beautiful and elaborate creations—what are they but complex processing of available information producing some output?
Sorry for running long, but I assume nobody expected this thread to consist of short messages
PS As for free consent, yes, there are people like Edith Eger who wrote her excellent and painful book "The Choice," so this issue, like all the statements in my post, is an open question for me. I don't know the answer, and I don't know if I'll ever know it.
Gashho
Paul
Sat today & Lent a hand
Comment