A Theoretical Question About Creating "Life".

nerbot
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed

 

Any computer, however large or sophisticated is and will only ever be just a mass of inanimate objects.

I could argue the brain is also "only" a complex network of brain cells and synapses and electric power zooming between the synapses. (Of course I do not tend to the materialist view; then again...WHO KNOWS?) Isn't it irrelevant to some extent whether the underlying "mechanic" that gives birth to consciousness is some "powerful" computer or organic material, blood, cells etc....what does it matter?

Fylgje
I think the difference is humans have a soul and A.I. does not. I'm not saying that A.I. cannot be very close, but still, the difference is in that.

Obviously as someone w/ a more "spiritual" view I would first want to agree, but how can I? I do not 100% know whether a soul independently from "the body" exists (although I STRONGLY believe this being the case)...and obviously I do not know whether a consciousness made from a ultra-complex computer/AI would not at some point develop a soul?

The idea that at some point an "artificial" consciousness is indeed created but we say "IT DOES NOT HAVE A SOUL" purely based on belief and assumption is somewhat frightening!

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed


An interesting discussion. Alot of assumptions in technological development could be made though. You can take apart the machine, put it back together and it will still be 'alive'. However (with our current development) that would not be possible with humans.

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed


I get what you're saying. It may be possible at some point to integrate processors and human cells, and maybe the robot could become a living thing, but, I would always know that it is a robot and could not hold it's value the same as I do a humans. Is this some form of racism, or bigotry?