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 68 by bluethread]

Then do you consider your theology to be threatened by AI. If so, how so?

No. My theology takes into account not only human made AI, but also the possibility that Adonai is AI [him] self (based on the biblical accounts of the Garden of Eden taken literally) created by an ancient biological species - see here for more details on that.

If not, why can I not hold a theology that is also not threatened by AI?

Why are you being so cagey and defensive? No one has said you cannot hold a theology that is not threatened by AI. But you have yet to show this as being the case, rather than make abstruse remarks about 'Adonai' and 'covenants' and 'his people' etc.

None of that explains why you say there is the no threat. All it does is exclaim.

[1213]

....The Bible suggests that thinking only comes from the inspiration of God. Today we know otherwise since AI, that is a human created computer program, can literally out think humans. ...

In Christian point of view, God created humans, if humans then build machines, that also comes from God, who is the original cause?

However, is the AI really thinking? By what I know, people have programmed it to do certain task (calculate). I dont think it is same as independently intelligent thinking matter.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 68 by bluethread]

Then do you consider your theology to be threatened by AI. If so, how so?

No. My theology takes into account not only human made AI, but also the possibility that Adonai is AI [him] self (based on the biblical accounts of the Garden of Eden taken literally) created by an ancient biological species - see here for more details on that.

If not, why can I not hold a theology that is also not threatened by AI?

Why are you being so cagey and defensive? No one has said you cannot hold a theology that is not threatened by AI. But you have yet to show this as being the case, rather than make abstruse remarks about 'Adonai' and 'covenants' and 'his people' etc.

None of that explains why you say there is the no threat. All it does is exclaim.

I do not think I said that there is no threat. That would be to assert a negative and that can not be proven. What I believe I said is that I see no threat. If you think there is one, it is for you to presents the presumed threat, so that it can be examined. In the absence of any such threat being presented, the assertion that there is such a threat is mere speculation.

[William]

[Replying to post 73 by bluethread]

Well then lets examine your reasoning then.

I do not think I said that there is no threat. That would be to assert a negative and that can not be proven. What I believe I said is that I see no threat. If you think there is one, it is for you to presents the presumed threat, so that it can be examined. In the absence of any such threat being presented, the assertion that there is such a threat is mere speculation.

The gist of the thread was an inquiry - you have replied to that, that you see no threat to your theology based upon the idea that AI might present a threat to theology....to belief in GOD.

However, even though you have been questioned about this you remain aloof in explaining WHY you see no threat...and now the above, which gives the reader the impression that you do not see a threat because no threat was presented.

I presented a number of reasonable situations which might unfold in relation to advance in the AI technology which is what the OP clearly was also doing, which might been seen to be a threat but instead of answering my questions in relation to your theology regarding those situations which might unfold, you sidestepped those through saying the above.

Certainly your mysterious occultism may appear to protect your reasoning and theology from inquiry but a simply 'I don't wish to deal with 'what if's' would have done the job in less time.

But whatever.

I can't say I am anymore closer to understanding your position.

Can I assume that if Andonai created human beings specifically that they would one day create AI which would be more appropriate as devices for his agenda, you agree that this is the most likely reason he created humans beings?

I ask this because I have mentioned it as a possible and even probable conclusion to draw and showed how kosher and commandments created for - or at least by - humans would not be necessary in relation to AI.

In this, you see no threat to your theology...humans who think humanity is important might see it as a threat but it is not the case for your particular theology, and one can assume this would be the case because your theology understands already that Adonai is only interested in human beings as a means to an end, and the rituals of your theology are specific to assuring Adonai that those who are in support of him and his agenda (keeping the covenant) are recognizable by that.

What is it exactly that Adonai's 'people' hope to receive from him for their efforts? Perhaps to inherit the bodies (and thus capabilities) of AI?

[Monta]

[[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 827#904827]


AI beat Kaspersky in chess 20 years ago.

Perhaps it was better equipped to utilize all the data it programmed with.

Recently AI was asked how to solve corruption problem in Ukraine and it went blank.

Had no ability to solve a problem which had not been programmed.

[Mithrae]

[Replying to post 75 by Monta]

I'd pretty much draw a blank on that one too; even moreso if previously-input parameters like "independent oversight" and "transparency" were disallowed. Answers like that are not some kind of magical 'human intuition,' they are developed over a period of decades through direct input of information and refined through trial and error. My guesses at age fifteen would have been even worse than anything I'd guess today. Find a person raised in solitude, with no education or human interaction and see how well they answer the question - I think you'd find that they'd fare even more poorly than an average fifteen year old because they haven't received as much programming.

[Danmark]

[[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 827#904827]


AI beat Kaspersky in chess 20 years ago.

Perhaps it was better equipped to utilize all the data it programmed with.

Recently AI was asked how to solve corruption problem in Ukraine and it went blank.

Had no ability to solve a problem which had not been programmed.

Even more impressive than Deep Blue's victory over Garry Kasparov, is AlphaGo's match with Lee Sedol. Great movie of it makes AI entertaining. https://www.alphagomovie.com/

[bluethread]

Can I assume that if Andonai created human beings specifically that they would one day create AI which would be more appropriate as devices for his agenda, you agree that this is the most likely reason he created humans beings?

That is circular reasoning. If something is specifically created for a particular task, that would be the reason it having been created. So, if you can show that to be the case, then any threat related to that would be a consideration.

I ask this because I have mentioned it as a possible and even probable conclusion to draw and showed how kosher and commandments created for - or at least by - humans would not be necessary in relation to AI.

They also do not apply to animals. In fact, they do not apply to all human beings.

In this, you see no threat to your theology...humans who think humanity is important might see it as a threat but it is not the case for your particular theology, and one can assume this would be the case because your theology understands already that Adonai is only interested in human beings as a means to an end, and the rituals of your theology are specific to assuring Adonai that those who are in support of him and his agenda (keeping the covenant) are recognizable by that.

No, I did not say that Adonai is only interested in human beings as a means to an end. Adonai's interest in man is not clear. What is clear is that Adonai expects certain things from His people. What He expects from others is also not clear.

What is it exactly that Adonai's 'people' hope to receive from him for their efforts? Perhaps to inherit the bodies (and thus capabilities) of AI?

Well, there are several stated benefits, depending on which commandment on is speaking of. However, inheriting the the bodies of AI, whatever that is, is not one of them.

[Monta]

[[url=http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 797#904797]

Theology is on safe ground.
We know Who has created us where we have come from where we are going.

While our physical bodies are put together from the star-dust, our souls -that which thinks and feels and creates comes from the Divine. It is of heavenly order and AI or anything else can not compete with it.

But wars or atom bomb or AI can affect some people to change/modify/abandon their personal theology-religion, it does not change the unchangable divine order.

[Danmark]

While our physical bodies are put together from the star-dust, our souls -that which thinks and feels and creates comes from the Divine. It is of heavenly order and AI or anything else can not compete with it.

But wars or atom bomb or AI can affect some people to change/modify/abandon their personal theology-religion, it does not change the unchangable divine order.

Zero evidence for any of these claims. You might as well claim unicorns wear pink bows.
I've been thinking lately that the central aspect of religion in general and the Abrahamic religions in particular is the believe in life after death; that the individual continues after his body dies, that his personality and consciousness, self awareness lives on forever in paradise.
I can think of two things that support this belief:
1) You were taught this from an early age.
2) It is a much more pleasant alternative to accepting death.

In other words, there is no factual, logical reason to believe any of this wishful thinking.