What happened to deep conversations?

[Roma]

Dr.Grass said:

Roma said:

Dr.Grass said:

Roma said:
the thought I had was that if we humans can create the things we can today and what we will be able to create in the near future like human like robots with their own will to learn, think and act. if the human race survives, lets say for one million years imagine what we would be able to do! Time and time again we have created the impossible! so with that thought in mind why is it so hard to believe that we are created by the creator?

I mean we can maybe not yet but soon be able to create human like AI in a computer world and implement the thought of "were we created or did we just come from nothing" thought in to that AI.

There is not a shred of information in all the scientific books of the modern world about the subjective experience of consciousness all of us here experience every moment of our lives. Nothing.

This grand canyon of an explanation gap is unserimoniously overlooked, and instead the angry masses are demanding evidence for the God of the ancients, and - they're demands unmet - unruefully slay the existence of the Eternal with the sword of vengeful arrogance.

Is there not divinity in man? And if there is, how would you know of it if you gorge yourselves upon the carcasses of the dead and pump your vesself full of stimulatants during your waking hours? The mindless staring at a square of lit pixels is claimed as an advantage over the primitive forefathers, but to what end is this 'marvel' employed? Staring at young, exploited women who fill your heart and mind with endless impressions of lust and violence?

Your post suggest that personhood is understood. The truth of the matter is that we are further away than ever in understanding it. There may be protests at this statement, but you have no equations to back up your protests.

well human like doesn't have to be an exact copy of human consciousness rather something that resembles it. I didn't actually give it that much thought. Just thought it would be a good example of what we can mimic in a computer world.


love your posts btw!

Aah, but herein lies the whole point. A machine is simply carrying out predetermined instructions. More than this, the experience of "I'ness" (and our language really does fail us here) is not conceivably possible for a machine... Or (shielding the screaming protests from my ears)...

If it were, then it should be entirely possible to similate a computer personage that has the same experience of identity as you and I have. As I've said before, this really requires some reflection. What is the common factor in "the you" of now and "the you" that was playing on the grass as a 5 year old? What could it possibly be?

consciousness of course