2020 (re: 2013) - fictionWhat happens in the dialogue between the human and the artificial [ ... ] — Jack Cummins
:up: :up:
I don't think there are any "ethical implications" unique to either the naturalistic-chaotic (Dewey, Deleuze, Prigogine-Stengers) or the theistic-teleological (Whitehead, Hartshorne) versions of process philosophy.But my question is about the ethical implications of it [process philosophy]
... and also not free of consequences. :100:Our choices can be voluntary but they are not free from determinants and constraints. — Truth Seeker
From Witty & co, iirc, 'tautologies' are information-free, necessary repetitions (syntax) and 'logic', constituted by tautologies and rules of inference, is a consistency metric (systematicity) that is strictly applicable to grammatical (semantic) as well as mathematical (formal) expressions. Thus, I think of logic as sets of scaffoldings for excavating knowledge from nature and/or building (new) knowledge with nature – that is, making explicit maps of the terrain (i.e. possibilities) which are constitutive of the terrain (i.e. actuality (e.g. Witty's "totality of facts")). Nonetheless, imo even more fundamental than tautologies, contradictions are a priori modal constraints on ontology (i.e. the instantiation of logic, ergo mathematics, semiosis & pragmatics (Spinoza, A. Meinong, U. Eco, Q. Meillassoux ...)) which entail 'impossible worlds', or necessary non-actuality.So, what are your thoughts about tautologies apart from the standard stuff said here? — Shawn
Another hidden premise.I assume it is true ... — MoK
Ad hoc ...God is by definition the creator.
Why not? – a third hidden premise. :roll:To make this explicit I can change P1 from "God exists", to "God exists and is the creator".
There's a possible world in which you did not make that OP. — Banno
The OP raises whether or not it's possible to 'change the past' of the actual world (i.e. retroactively making a choice different from the choice that already has been made); imo counterpart choices in 'parallel / possible worlds' are not relevant to the question at hand.Under any nondeterminist interpretation, one 'could have chosen differently', or even might not have faced the choice at all. It also works under some fully deterministic interpretations like MWI where all possible choices are made in some world. — noAxioms
My reply to the OP is consistent with compatibilism – not your strawman.So 180 Proof presumes the universe is determinate, then concludes that we cannot make choices — Banno
Neither C1 nor C2 validly follow because P1 is not true and P2 contains a hidden premise ("There exists a creator").P1) God exists
D1) The act of creation is defined as an act of creating the creation from nothing
P2) The creation exists
C1) Therefore, there is a situation in which the creation does not exist (from D1 and P2)
C2) Therefore, there is a situation in which God only exists (from P1 and C1) — MoK
Unless the universe (of determinant forces and constraints on one) changes too, I don't think so.Could anyone have made a different choice in the past than the ones they made? — Truth Seeker
Unless what is meant here by "God" is synonymous with "nothing" ...P1) The act of creation is caused by an agent so-called God
D1) This act is defined as an act of creation of something from nothing
C1) Therefore, there is a state of affairs where there is nothing but God (from P1 and D1) — MoK
Can you prove temperature exists? or color exists? or charge exists? etc ...Can you prove time exists? — Corvus
What do we make of Nietzsche today? Considered by some as the father of existentialism ... — Nemo2124
Freddy seems to me 'an absurdist skeptic of European modernity' (both heir to Epicurus, Spinoza & Voltaire and predecessor of Zapffe, Camus & Rosset). "Some are born posthumously" ... yet, apparently, his protean works have been coopted – mis/appropriated :mask: – by both existentialists and postmodernists (as well as nazi / fascist propagandists). Just my two shekels.I view Nietzsche as the father of postmodernism, and as a critic of existentialism. — Joshs
Nope. I didn't make it past your "Is Jesus God?"So, I take it thatyou acceptthe non-Christian argument, andyou rejectthe Christian argument. And it seems thatyou denythe second premise, FTI2 — Arcane Sandwich
Given that both "God" and "Jesus" are fictions, yes / no depending on each e.g. Biblical, Quranic or Vedic author (make-believer) I suppose.Is Jesus God? — Arcane Sandwich
:strong: :lol:Can Santa Claus beat up Batman?
— T Clark
Nope, I think it's the other way around.
Batman can quite clearly whoop Santa Claus' ass. — Arcane Sandwich
:smirk:
As I see it, this is why ...I'm beginning to see why [process] philosophy never really took off. — Darkneos
:up: :up:Hegelian, something Nietzsche was not. The problem with 'Good and Evil' isn't only that it flips the valuation of world based 'Good and bad' on its head, and are thus world and life-denying, but also that it distorts them in the process... it moralises them. — ChatteringMonkey
No doubt this is true of "AI" (such as LLMs, AlphaGo series neural nets, etc) but only will be the case if exponentially self-improving Artificial General Intelligence (A) cannot be engineered and implemented or (B) cannot 'escape' the lab (which will be far less likely when AGI is operational). Otherwise, to wit:AI will always need human intervention in their operations, development and continual existence in the real world. — Corvus
https://www.zdnet.com/article/openais-o3-isnt-agi-yet-but-it-just-did-something-no-other-ai-has-done/You'll know AGI is here when the exercise of creating tasks that are easy for regular humans but hard for AI becomes simply impossible. — François Chollet, author of ARC-AGI and scientist in Google's artificial intelligence unit
I have had my fun
If I never get well no more
I have had my fun
If I never get well no more
Whoa, my health is fadin'
Oh yes, I'm goin' down slow
I don't understand your question.How may this be established clearly and, is it fettered by the sentient aspects of human perception and thinking?. — Jack Cummins
Both have always made more practical sense to me than any form of "sky daddy" (unseen total surveillance / gnostic panopticon ... aka "Big (Br)Other") worship.ancient forms of sun worship and fertility rites of paganism — Jack Cummins
:100:... dualism on a runaway train. How does a system not subject to natural laws become a source of those laws? Unmoved movers? Something from nothing? All you are [@Gnomon is] doing is complicating things unnecessarily. — Harry Hindu
Yes, I imagine – 'a plausible' best case scenario – 22nd/23rd century* Earth as a global nature preserve with a much smaller (>1 billion) human population of 'conservationists, park rangers & eco-travelers' who are mostly settled in widely distributed (regional), AI-automated arcologies (and even space habitats e.g. asteroid terreria) in order to minimize our ecological footprint as much as possible.James Lovelock, in his final writings spoke of the possiblity of a race of artificial intelligent beings and some remaining human beings overseeing the natural world. — Jack Cummins
No more than "humans worshipping" the internet (e.g. social media, porn, gambling, MMORPGs). As an idolatrous species we don't even "worship" plumbing-sanitation, (atomic) clocks, electricity grids, phones, banking or other forms of (automated) infrastructure which dominate – make possible – modern life.Would it be a matter of humans 'worshipping' the artificial intelligent beings as the superior 'overlords'?
However, I suspect that the accelerating development and distribution of systems of metacognitive automation (soon-to-be AI agents rather than just AI tools (e.g. LLMs)) will also automate all macro 'human controls' before the last of the (tech/finance) oligarchs can pull the proverbial plugs; ergo ...It may be that our role on this planet is not to worship God – but to [build it]. — Arthur C. Clarke
... my guess (hope): "AGI" (post-scarcity automation sub-systems —> Kardashev Type 1*) will serve and "ASI" (post-terrestrial megaengineering systems —> Kardashev Type 2) will master, and thereby post-scarcity h. sapiens (micro-agents) will be AGI's guests, passengers, wards, patients & protectees ... like all other terrestrial flora and fauna.*Who[What] would be servant and master? — Jack Cummins
:fire:Man is something that shall be overcome. Man is a rope, tied between beast and [the singularity] — a rope over an abyss. What is great in man is that he is a bridge and not an end. — Friedrich Nietzsche
You know that what you eat
you are
But what is sweet now
turns so sour
We all know Obla-Di-Bla-Da
But can you show me
where you are? — George Harrison