Does Artificial Intelligence Pose a Threat to Belief in God?

[Danmark]

We have created AI that can play chess better than world champions. We have machines that can create poetry. When man creates a 'thinking machine,' a machine that can learn on its own, what questions does this raise about religious belief? The discovery of the heliocentric universe and the theory of evolution have represented profound threats to traditional religious thought.

"The creation of non-human autonomous robots would disrupt religion, like everything else, on an entirely new scale. "If humans were to create free-willed beings, says Kelly, who was raised Catholic and identifies as a Christian, absolutely every single aspect of traditional theology would be challenged and have to be reinterpreted in some capacity.

Take the soul, for instance. Christians have mostly understood the soul to be a uniquely human element, an internal and eternal component that animates our spiritual sides."
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ty/515463/

[William]

[Replying to post 10 by Danmark]

Yes, all very well ,but Does Artificial Intelligence Pose a Threat to Belief in GOD?

[liamconnor]

[quote="Danmark"

We have created AI that can play chess better than world champions.

Not a quintessentially human element.

We have machines that can create poetry.

I do not know enough of the history of AI; I would need to know what definition of "poetry" is being used. Mere rhyming?

When man creates a 'thinking machine,' a machine that can learn on its own, what questions does this raise about religious belief?

None come to mind. Either there is or is not a God.

The discovery of the heliocentric universe and the theory of evolution have represented profound threats to traditional religious thought.

A blanket statement. The real history of the so called Copernican revolution shows that religious concerns were minor. And evolution, as far as I can tell, bothers only one branch of Christianity.

"The creation of non-human autonomous robots would disrupt religion, like everything else, on an entirely new scale. "If humans were to create free-willed beings, says Kelly, who was raised Catholic and identifies as a Christian, absolutely every single aspect of traditional theology would be challenged and have to be reinterpreted in some capacity.

I do not see how this follows. Either there is or is not a God: for Christians, either Jesus was or was not God incarnate; either he did or did not rise from the dead.

Take the soul, for instance. Christians have mostly understood the soul to be a uniquely human element, an internal and eternal component that animates our spiritual sides."

I have read no literature that shows AI surviving deletion.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 10 by Danmark]

Yes, all very well ,but Does Artificial Intelligence Pose a Threat to Belief in GOD?

I suggest it does.
When Homo sapiens can make a machine that is better at processing thoughts than the 'creature' God supposedly made, then what other conclusion is possible?

[JehovahsWitness]

We have created AI that can play chess better than world champions.

We? Who "we" could you per chance be referring to "we" as in "intelligent designers"? Don't you mean AI has created AI that can play chess better than world champion? In fact, shouldn't we remove the word "created" from the process...so don't you mean to say

• "A whole bunch of metal has exploded itself into a room and lay there for for a long, long LONG L-O-N-G time... and has by natural processes (and a series of happy coincidences) evolved into AI that can play chess better than world champions"?

Now THERE you got yourself a headline to worry the religionists!!

I'll explain: "We" refers to humans, to those of our species who have developed artificial intelligence.

Yes I know, that's what is so amusing, notably that you are asking if the suggestion that intelligent designers (humans) have been necessary in the creation of a form of intelligence could possibly undermine the notion of intelligent design being necessary for the presence of intelligence. I do believe a degree of critical thinking skills will be necessary to see the irony.

Do you see the irony?

Reminds me of the joke:

Two scientists are boasting God. "We too, one day will be able to create man from the dust from the ground like you did" .

"Is that so?" God replies, raising a divine eyebrow.

"Indeed" the scientists continue, "it will only be a matter of time until we have the technology."

"Be my guest" says God, waving them on.

So the scientists get out their test tubes and begin gathering dust. "What are you doing?" asks God.

"We're gathering dust to begin our experiments"

"Uh-uh... no you don't..." God replies "make your own dust!".

[Bust Nak]

Yes I know, that's what is so amusing, notably that you are asking if the suggestion that intelligent designers (humans) have been necessary in the creation of a form of intelligence...

Woah, what's this about necessary? More to the point: the creation of a form of intelligence through purely natural means does indeed undermine the notion of divine intervention being necessary for the presence of intelligence.

[William]

[Replying to post 13 by Danmark]

When Homo sapiens can make a machine that is better at processing thoughts than the 'creature' God supposedly made, then what other conclusion is possible?

Well one off the top of my head would be that the human form was a means to an end so to speak.

In which case, the human form was perfect for the job.

[Danmark]

[Replying to post 13 by Danmark]

When Homo sapiens can make a machine that is better at processing thoughts than the 'creature' God supposedly made, then what other conclusion is possible?

Well one off the top of my head would be that the human form was a means to an end so to speak.

In which case, the human form was perfect for the job.

So, you are suggesting that God made man so man could invent a machine that thinks better that God. Well, I suppose a God who would create a world, call it good, then call it corrupt and destroy most of his creation might do that.

[Danmark]

We have created AI that can play chess better than world champions.

We? Who "we" could you per chance be referring to "we" as in "intelligent designers"? Don't you mean AI has created AI that can play chess better than world champion? In fact, shouldn't we remove the word "created" from the process...so don't you mean to say

• "A whole bunch of metal has exploded itself into a room and lay there for for a long, long LONG L-O-N-G time... and has by natural processes (and a series of happy coincidences) evolved into AI that can play chess better than world champions"?

Now THERE you got yourself a headline to worry the religionists!!

I'll explain: "We" refers to humans, to those of our species who have developed artificial intelligence.

Yes I know, that's what is so amusing, notably that you are asking if the suggestion that intelligent designers (humans) have been necessary in the creation of a form of intelligence could possibly undermine the notion of intelligent design being necessary for the presence of intelligence. I do believe a degree of critical thinking skills will be necessary to see the irony.

Do you see the irony?

Reminds me of the joke:

Two scientists are boasting God. "We too, one day will be able to create man from the dust from the ground like you did" .

"Is that so?" God replies, raising a divine eyebrow.

"Indeed" the scientists continue, "it will only be a matter of time until we have the technology."

"Be my guest" says God, waving them on.

So the scientists get out their test tubes and begin gathering dust. "What are you doing?" asks God.

"We're gathering dust to begin our experiments"

"Uh-uh... no you don't..." God replies "make your own dust!".

You've quoted me saying what YOU wrote. Please don't do that. And if you are going to tell a joke, I'd suggest a funny one.
You've used a false equivalency and called it irony. Here's the problem:
We know men can make machines, very good machines. Machines and art are examples of man's creations. God is also one of man's creations. When one imagines a god in man's image he imagines him creating the universe, because he apparently cannot imagine a universe that has always been, a universe that does not need a creator. Thus he turns his own limitation into religion.

Unable to understand or accept the concept of a universe that did not need a designer, he invents a supersized version of himself and calls it 'God.'

[Danmark]

"A whole bunch of metal has exploded itself into a room and lay there for for a long, long LONG L-O-N-G time... and has by natural processes (and a series of happy coincidences) evolved into AI that can play chess better than world champions"?

This is an extremely lame attempt to describe the history of the universe and the evolution. Do you really think you've accurately described the processes involved or are you purposely creating an absurd strawman?

[William]

[Replying to post 17 by Danmark]

So, you are suggesting that God made man so man could invent a machine that thinks better that God.

No. I am not sure how you came to that conclusion based upon what I said.