Note to mod. I wasn't sure where to post this thread. It has more elements of science than religion but both subjects are necessarily discussed. Why the Turing AI test is quickly becoming obsolete. And what does God, SETI and AI have in common? For those of you that severely dislike me (ha ha...ehhhh), my religion and my writing you can skip the bulk of this thread, and go to the bottom of the page to the blue font. That is where the questions and most of the debatable material is. The filler is for reference and to help the reader understand my position from a religious perspective. Growing up father was a (secular) deist, mom was a fair weather christian, both became far more devout as they aged. I began to wonder about god atheism etc as soon as I quit pooing yellow. So I tried the few religions that highly interested me and researched those that had elements of interest. I wondered what is ultimate truth, Is it secular in nature, or does God exist and what the freak is our reason for existing if any. Today, twenty years after I began searching, after surviving the world at large, the army, ten years of night school to fight boredom and to learn things I was very curious about, all the while working for an international company in the day and in some truly god awful places, I finally obtained a BA/BS, then later a MA nearly by accident more than anything else. Anyway I am happy and secure in my beliefs that there is a God and that it’s a personal God. That leads me to the subject of this thread. Self awareness, sentience in biological systems and machines (computer AI). It occurred to me that a billion year advanced race could easily possess the technology to be the Gods of mythology or of the bible including Jesus, and do the miracles therein'. Believe it or not, I as a Christian minister albeit a non-traditional reverend, would be too upset if it were proven that God was an immortal disembodied spirit that created time, space, us, Homo sapiens and our universe, especially if (it, he) had the attributes set forth in the Hebrew bible. Don't abandon me my friends I am still the Rev that believes that Jesus Christ is my lord and Savior and is the son of the Hebrew God. No ha ha, I have not morphed into a cult leader and I will post a reply to clarify that last statement. So now we come to the question and debating points of this thread. (1) For the semi and fully religious would you accept God if he were to say that he was what we call an ET but was not created and was immortal and all the things in our bible happened by his hand. (2) for atheists. If you are the type of atheist that believes the existence of God is impossible, but you are ’science minded‘, how can you dismiss that something like the above, far fetched as it is could theoretically happen? It seems to me that God could be as real as the hundreds of SETI telescopes once funded by NASA. (3) for everyone. It’s my belief that the most difficult thing for man to create is not a machine that can perfectly mimic a human so well that it could ace thousands of Turing tests without one failure (at some point in the future). No that is nearly possible today. What I think we may never be able to accomplish is to create a self aware machine. A machine with a soul so to speak, in the foreseeable future, say the next 200 years. Will accurately testing a computer or AI for self awareness be more difficult than achieving an intelligence equivalency with humans, at be able to pass the Turing test*? * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test Even if we did create a machine that said “yes dave I am self aware and sentient“. How would we know (unless we had the build plans) if the machine was faking it by information written into its program or if it really was sentient! So the Turing test is not as useful as it was in the day IMO. I am sure it will soon be obsolete, but what will replace it is the million dollar question. reva
Sorry, the God described in the Bible cannot be an ET. Both omniscience and omnipotence are logical impossibilities. Also, the Bible describes God as the creator of the Universe, and if God=ET, what created ET? This is essentially the First Cause problem, and the immortal ET does not resolve it. And how do you tell if a machine really is self-aware? Answer: the Turing Test. Or a logical equivalent. If you can't tell if the machine is faking it or not, regardless of the questions you ask ... why isn't that self-aware?
Why Alan Turing should be better well-known... Alan Turing: why the tech world's hero should be a household name 18 June 2012 > Rory Cellan-Jones gets a preview of an exhibition dedicated to the life and work of scientist and computer pioneer Alan Turing.
Uncle Ferd says, "Hmmm, how queer... Alan Turing: Gay codebreaker's defiance keeps memory alive 22 June 2012 - Experts at a centenary celebration at Cambridge University consider what Alan Turing's greatest contributions are
Turing's suicide in doubt... Alan Turing: Inquest's suicide verdict 'not supportable' 23 June 2012 - Turing was found dead in his bed by his housekeeper
I'm not sure what you are asking here. God IS an ET by definition anyway; he didn't "come from" Earth. But he couldn't be just a super-technological alien, if that's what you mean, because there is no way to have the technology to create the universe, before the universe was created. No, the story requires something else. Or maybe I am misunderstanding you?
ET or no, the Hebrew god is another small-time thug who ordered the massacre of men, women and children by its "chosen people." Pray tell, how on Earth did you ever come to the conclusion that that despicable product of primitive human thinking is in fact something real and worthy of worship? Jesus is one of countless solar heroes and messiahs from a time when they were cropping up all over that part of the world.
ET God could have stepped in at any point through the formation of this planet and its life, though there's no apparent need for it to have done so, and that still leaves the question of the ET god's origins to be answered. If we had to be created by Mr. ET Deity, didn't it also need to be created by something at some point?
I'm atheist. But I believe that God exists as a manifestation of conscious thought in a human mind. Is it real? Only to the extent that it in forms the actions of that hairy stinky meat puppet. Like I said, God exists, in the solipsistic sense. It may be an illusion or it may be magic, but in the end, what's the difference? It's a passive concept that contributes no real answers to any real questions. Yes, the Turing model is very outdated. The human mind has biases. If the human mind is the model for which we determine consciousness, then we have no empirical data from which to draw conclusions. I'm aware that this could completely undermine my whole argument, but you have to start somewhere, right?!
OK, but the origins of ET God (which is redundant, because there is no terrestrial God) are no more mysterious than the origins of "regular" God, unless you want to say that "regular" God created ET God, but that goes against the premise of the OP. In any case, I don't think the OP introduced any infinite regression problems that weren't already there.
Alan Turing gets pardon... UK FINALLY PARDONS COMPUTER PIONEER ALAN TURING Dec 24,`13 -- His code breaking prowess helped the Allies outfox the Nazis, his theories laid the foundation for the computer age, and his work on artificial intelligence still informs the debate over whether machines can think.
You may be mistaking irritation shading off into disgust, for dislike. Its not your religion, nor your writing, per so. It is your serial habit of posting something outlandish, then scooting off ignoring challenges to it, and they you are next seen with a new topic, the old one abandoned, replies ignored. Why do you do that? Is it your plan here too?
I've noticed that too. And I'm on 'his end of the spectrum' and am no 'fundybot,' but have an open mind, and have yet to have him answer one of my responses on his threads. Methinks he just likes to stir the pot (as per his name) and output like most preachers, and but only looks for 'Amens' from the crowd...aka, a 'hit-and-run' evangelist Maybe he'll respond to this 'theologically inaccurate' post when I wish him a "Merry Christmas"..?!
Your number 3 question reminds me of the time the Captain was defending Data's sentience. He asks the members of the jury and the other officers at the hearing if they can prove that they themselves are sentient. Then he turns to the judge "Can you?" I can easily accept God as the kind of ET you describe. In fact, I think you're him, you've just forgotten for some reason. Can you prove me wrong?
Well that can depend, some people just want to put forward an opinion and see what others think of it. I'm on several other boards where we're invited to put forth examples of our writing for critiques. Although almost everyone does it (even me sometimes, it can be really hard not to) I've been given to understand it's sort of bad form to reply, defend, or explain yourself. The critiquer isn't making a value judgement but just saying what he thinks you were trying to say and how well he thinks you've said it. I realize this isn't that kind of board but the OP might be thinking of it as being a little bit that way. And there's also the fact that I've been told there are sometimes thousands of posts here daily. I've often found it hard to keep up, even with my own threads.
A person might in such case, in all "Christian" courtesy, consider a disclaimer like "Im a drive-by poster, replies will be ignored". Its pretty out to lunch to be taking irritation with that for "severe dislike of him and his religion" which smacks of the oh-so-common "Christian" thing of seeking, hoping for some of that "persecution" for which they think Jesus promised them some extra pennies in heaven.
Cheap shot, taikoo! But I agree that it is usually proper forum/debate etiquette to support ones OP.....
It sounds like a cheap shot to call it that, with no supporting statement. What that I said is not exactly correct? I see that same "persecution" thing all the time. Tho, I will say, not from you, who I take to be above such shabby devices.
Ha ha, indeed. There is a philosophical position that claims the same thing i.e. no one can prove anything is real or sentient other than who making the claim (to themselves). That is why as computers become more and more sophisticated determining sentiency/self awareness is going to be nearly impossible. Is the computer really self aware or is it simply making the claim it is so, and how to prove either or. Maybe if we were privy to to every hard and software system nuance of the AI we might know if the artificial intelligence was lying. If it was not lying man oh man now that would be something that would bring on unimaginable change, some good some bad, all extraordinarily fantastic! If a computer really could become self aware i.e. possess a soul, not that probably WOULD effect my faith in a negative manner, unlike an Jesus as an ET. The profound thing (why it would so effect my faith) that strikes me is that I do not know why that is a fact! I suppose if souls were that easy to create, well, it would take the most profound God thing out of the realm of the supernatural which would weaken Gods exclusivity greatly, and make a supernatural realm even less probable than a metaverse or infinite or multi-dimensioned universe. Hmm that is unless the other infinite dimensional etc universes or the equally improbable metaverse theory are the supernatural realm? Those are mused to maybe be impossible to visit, or if we visit we according to every theory I have read we could never ever return to our own universe etc having forever and immutably changed the timeline/future etc of every universe etc. Oh well that is material for another thread eh? (REPLY TO POST #12 and 13); As for Takikoo and overdrives criticisms of my not answering some replies I stand convicted guilty as charged. However the reasons for not answering are never because I do not care or I am at a loss for a rebuttal. Many, many, MANY, times bashers are unanswered because I have posted a disclaimer stating I will not answer insulting sniveling childish hate speech thinly veiled as an answer or reply. There are other reasons as well, for example; My work load is overwhelming lately. Devilments make relational demands upon my time with zero time left for fun on the computer. Then there is the ever popular repeating the same answer over and over and over, I refuse to do it to entertain trolls. Yes sometimes I am lazy too, for those I apologize. For the others that are for all intensive proposes unforeseen and not intentional I do feel ya all that take the time to reply sans an answer. I love everyone here at PF as brothers and sisters in the flesh and some as spiritual relives. I thank everyone that replies and God bless ya all and this forum. If I could I would sprinkle the forum with real holy water, In lieu of that I will give the forum a VIRTUAL golden shower (relax, just kidding)! I will pray for PFs continued prosperity (that last sentence is truth btw). reva
A rules violation as well maybe! But as a Christian I won't report, because Jesus teaches to attempt to love those that would do us harm. Additionally I know the reason for such attacks. Even if or even not, I am accustomed such replies, most are not fit for a reply as they are looking for attention, again good or bad, much like a child, and all children are easy to forgive. reva
Obsolete you say? Well it's in fact one of the most comical things i ever seen in my life, the turing test. A test made up to fulfill the right conditions for a machine to be considered " thinking ", that's wonderful but if by thinking you mean replicating to a predetermined number of questions, well that's exactly what your personal pc/cell phone can already do. It's pretty much as if i took a talking doll and say it's intelligent because it answers to me lol
I'm an non believer but I read the parts you advised to skip over, just because I disagree with most of what you usually post, the entire post was relevant...and I found it a very good post, now I'll have to spend some time and give the questions asked some serious thought....
