Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: unspun; betty boop
Just an observation, but it seems to me that over the years theology has been troubled by various advances in science at the time, from the solar system to evolution.

These days, strong artificial intelligence is troubling to some probably for pretty much the same reason as the study of collective consciousness ---- on the one hand, that the mind is only a machine and therefore there is no soul and no free will - and on the other, that the One we know as God will be displaced by phenomenon attributed to a "force."

I'm sure each such advance in science have caused (or will cause) some to lose what little faith they had (have.) The strong in faith cannot be moved by anything at all.

To me, this suggests that the answer lies in helping the young and weak in faith grow strong. After all, there is no telling what doors science will open in the future.

523 posted on 08/21/2003 9:13:41 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies ]


To: Alamo-Girl; unspun; Phaedrus; js1138; VadeRetro; RightWhale; Right Wing Professor; ...
These days, strong artificial intelligence is troubling to some probably for pretty much the same reason as the study of collective consciousness ---- on the one hand, that the mind is only a machine and therefore there is no soul and no free will - and on the other, that the One we know as God will be displaced by phenomenon attributed to a "force."

Thanks for your thoughtful insights, A-G.

On the subject of artificial intelligence: If AI ("strong" or other) is being modeled on a machine analogy, then one wonders what kind of progress can be made. Living, conscious, thinking beings are not "machines": For a machine is a unity of order, and not of substance. Kefatos/Nadeau write: "Artifacts or machines are...constructed from without, and the whole is simply the assemblage of all parts." And the order that exists in any machine is external to its parts.

But increasingly, science is telling us that the part-whole relationship in living, conscious, thinking beings is an entirely different affair. As Ernst Mayr wrote, living systems "almost always have the peculiarity that the characteristics of the whole cannot (not even in theory) be deduced from the most complete knowledge of components, taken separately or in other partial combinations. This appearance of new characteristics in wholes has been designated emergence."

This is what I have referred to in the past as "irreducible complexity." The order of the living being is emergent "from within," not imposed "from without."

If we want to build "thinking machines," then this would seem to represent a daunting logistical problem.

Similarly, those who would say that God (understood as some kind of collective consciousness) can be "translated" as "force" likewise may be using the "wrong model" -- in more ways than one.

524 posted on 08/21/2003 11:16:16 AM PDT by betty boop (Bohr is brutally realistic in epistemological terms. -- Kafatos & Nadeau)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies ]

To: Alamo-Girl
Well said.

It all gets back to... well, "...from Him and through Him and to Him are all things."
567 posted on 08/21/2003 8:10:34 PM PDT by unspun ("Do everything in love." | No I don't look anything like her but I do like to hear "Unspun w/ AnnaZ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson