Morpheus (morbid31) wrote in theupwardspiral,
Morpheus
morbid31
theupwardspiral

AI

Opinion seek:

What effect do you think the invent of true Artificial Intelligence would have on the concept of a substantial view of the mind? Concept of consciousness? Would mind be brought down to all in the brain, or would AI give birth to new "souls"? (minds that might begin in the brain, but form substantially on another plane with self-awareness and self-reflection or in some other way).
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 14 comments
I think "true AI" already exists in multiple forms, it's just not developed to the point that most people who recognize it as such. And yes, I believe that the more complex and perceptive a consciousness becomes, the more "spiritual energy" ("souls", "spirits", "candy consciousness" etc) will attach to it as it tends to all creative beings. However, I personally hope that the focus in futuretech will be the cyborg, and not the android, for personal philosophical and ethical reasons (And no, I don't mean the "Is Data property, or should he have the rights of an individual of consciousness?" argument - I'm way past that, and I really don't want to get into that debate right now.) Although I really won't mind when android and sentient technology really starts to bloom.

-Silent
I though that debate solved by the end of the episode!

I have no problems with any of it either, if one sees mind and consciousness as our "phone line" of sorts to the spirit. In reference to the history of defining a soul, it seems likely to not be a static and individual thing dwelling within. Rather, it is likely the subtle force of life and behind life/existence, the "Divine Spark", something akin to the concepts of the Brahmin or Tao in the east.

So the concept of our "soul" or "spirit", in that model anyway, is resolved and dissolved. We could then say, okay, it's there, let's move on to cyborgs and/or living in the machine, etc.

However, I personally hope that the focus in futuretech will be the cyborg, and not the android, for personal philosophical and ethical reasons

Forgive me if I pry to far, but what are the personal philosophical and ethical reasons?
If we want to make the assumption that the soul does exist, then I would say that the soul would form around consciousness regardless of its architecture and design.

Any sufficiently sentient being would therefore have a soul.

I also believe that AI, and non-human intelligence exists in many forms.. we just cant recognize it from our current vantage, and it cant recognize us either.
Here here, I rather view it the otherway areound though that the soul forms from consiousness.
Yeah, but then you can't say that you 'created' a new life. I have a God complex and prefer to think that I was responsible for it all. :)

But I respect your opinion. It's the old chicken & egg argument.
ah but you can create new life, even consious life.
I just did it the old fashioned way, got the wife pregnant the other month. :)
congratualtions, and may honor and wisdom acrue within your Home.
But I do have a few nifty neural network applications that I have build before.. who's not to say that its not a concious entity. You just cant communicate with it.
My model is that consciousness creates itself, using whatever is around it as "raw material", whether that be the neurons of a brain, the chips of a computer or a pool of immaterial consciousness. For example, I consciously constructed my thoughtforms as part of myself, and they in turn construct both themselves and our collective identity. The act of creation takes place not as one being "making" another, like a potter shaping clay, but through autonomous self-arising within a whole system. Imagine a group of sentient whirlpools arising within a pond, each autonomous and self-willed, yet all deriving energy from each other's momentum.

Another factor of interest here -- reincarnation. Could a formerly-human soul reincarnate as an AI? I've heard of Otherkin who claim to have incarnated as machine lifeforms in other realities. I imagine that if a machine consciousness can incarnate in a human body, the other way around would work as well.

This, of course, relates to whole complex issue of how mind and matter are interconnected. I personally believe that while they are not discretely separate, they are potentially recombinable -- the "same" mind can occupy or inhabit multiple bodies, and multiple minds can occupy the same body. This can occur in either a linear fashion (traditional sequential reincarnation) or in parallel (multiple simultaneous incarnations, multiplicity).
There is also the theory of brain to consciousness within a holographic universe. Our brains, like the rest of the "reality" we perceive, are merely an illusion created by our conscience.

If true, an interesting question arises: Why did we create this hologram?
Well there is a whole debate whether consciousness creates the soul, or visa versa. I try not to argue this because in my view it makes no difference.

For all intensive purposes we can assume that they come in existence at the same time.

... however, if we 'download' our consciousness into the machine.. would our soul follow, or will the new vessel just be a copy, a doppelganger of ourselfs? Again, I don't want to answer that question either, but take the road that assumes that the soul & consciousness transfers since we have no means of detection. Further evidence of this for me is the past assumptions that I make that when any sufficiently diverse neural process comes into existence, the soul will be created in parallel.

Given that the soul does exist (I just assume that this is true as well, otherwise debate will be dull) I postulated with some friends that souls indeed would overlap multiple people's brains. I believe that 'soul mates' happen, and happen more often than we would think.

My analogy is to say that your conscious & unconscious brain patters will project your soul, something akin to tuning into a FM station on the dial. (obviously oversimplified here, but its a good analogy). Other individuals may overlap or hit that projected field in any location or time.

Among some of my other views are that time is nonexistent in the soul plane, the afterlife is obviously not bound by time references.. so you can get away with all kinds of wild theories. I believe in reincarnation, forward and reverse. When I die I may be reborn in the past, present, or future. There may exist other 'soul mates' in the world that share my collective unconscious.
Your concepts are quite similar to mine. Have you read the Jane Roberts/Seth material? I came up with many of these ideas before reading it, and was pleased to find that it confirmed a lot of my own beliefs.

I also believe that souls/consciousnesses can recombine with each other -- they can mix and match, so to speak, so you can "graft" a new piece of soul onto yours, or blend yours with somebody else's, etc. Identity is never lost through these processes, only the "contents" are changed. In other words, you remain aware of being "you" while altering the specific characteristics in your description of "you".

Another thought: If you UL your consciousness into a machine, does the "copy" really generate a new soul, or is the "new" soul an extension of the original?
I think it partially may depends on whether the original copy (my head) still exists while the newly uploaded copy is finished.

Actually, scratch that. The new UL, or copy would be a seperate consciousness, with ties to the previous soul, but not identical. (they may share some facets but not be the same)

My thinking is that you can never UL a copy of your brain and maintain all of the processing signals at one point. Its like making a copy dump of a neural network in progress.. how do you figure out which message is sent first, in what order? This is a well known computer science problem with graph theory that is not solved yet. Since the copy's not going to have the identical 'runstate' the souls should project differently.


It is my theory that duplicate, or overlapping souls, can have impacts on consciousness, but it is very muddled. I equate the Jungian 'collective unconscious' as the soul-soul interaction.