There have been many studies where the mapped neural networks have been fed to the computer and the code was able to replicate the activity.
That is, if I were to say, touch an apple with my finger, a set of localised neurons would fire up in my brain and that is recorded with the fMRI machine and the data set is transferred to a computer in hopes of replication. — TheSoundConspirator
Sorry! I din't mean to offend you! Written messages sometimes do not show the writer's intention!Aye! — TheMadFool
Since topic deletion is most probably impossible, maybe you can make some modications or additions, that will justify your ideas based on scientifically/technically correct data. I can help in that, if you like. — Alkis Piskas
Good. No worries. We wlll be all still here! :smile:I'll give it my best shot. It might take some time though. — TheMadFool
I wonder what lies at the end of that road? — TheMadFool
AFE, I generally agree with your position on the distinction between human intelligence (HI) and artificial intelligence (AI). But I just finished reading The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, by physicists Barrow and Tipler, and with a foreword by famous physicist John A. Wheeler. Using the language of Physics & Mathematics, they argue for teleological evolution toward a far future "Omega Point". Even though there is no religious language in their argument, it's what would call "non-physical woo-of-the-gaps". That's because the Primary Protagonist of the argument is not an individual flesh & blood human, but the metaphysical abstraction : "Intelligent Life". (IL)Yes, cause and effect. Equal and opposites. The point is that humans, being that their ability to modify themselves and their intelligence is fundamental, not physical, makes them capable of true self-modification. Whereas a robot requires transistors, hard drives, memory or whatever it has to do it's processing therefore must depend on them working correctly to continue functioning. — AlienFromEarth
Omega Point — Gnomon
But it gives us a lot of positive plausible information to consider, when faced with hopeless negative apocalyptic worldviews. :cool: — Gnomon
Yes. The current mood, especially in the US, and on this forum, is pretty dismal. For example, it seems that the majority of movies in recent years have an end-of-world or post-apocalyptic theme. But downtrodden people are still motivated enough to push for positive change, despite their long history of struggling against all odds. So, for privileged people like me, pessimism is pretty petty.I wonder which of the two futures will come true? It doesn't hurt to look at the bright side, does it? :chin: — TheMadFool
That seems to also be the implication of physicists Barrow & Tipler in their 1985 book : The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. It was a sort of scientific update of Teilhard deChardin's Omega Point theory. However, in my personal worldview, the Alpha Point or First Cause is also Pantheistic, or as I prefer : PanEnDeistic. The "Omega" term is sufficiently suggestive & ambiguous, that many interpretations would fit the tenuous evidence at the current mid-point of Evolution. So, I don't pretend to know exactly where this evolving organism is headed. :smile:↪Gnomon
Pandeism is "my omega point". — 180 Proof
Pandeism is "my omega point — 180 Proof
That's because he inferred an overall tendency or positive principle, the "World Soul", which keeps the undulating universe on an upward track. In my personal worldview, that positive trend or principle is labeled "EnFormAction". It's similar to Plato's Logos, in that it's not just aimless Energy, but also the Rational power to enform. It's not just Tele-, it's also -Logical — Gnomon
??? — 180 Proof
the deity annihilates itself by becoming the universe in order to experience not being the deity. — 180 Proof
The belief that God became the Universe is a theological doctrine that has been developed several times historically, and holds that the creator of the universe actually became the universe — Wikipedia
I don't understand what you're asking, Fool. You've quoted my take on pandeism and a wiki too. I can't spoon-feed this metaphysical paradox any better than this:How? What does that mean? — TheMadFool
This is how I imagine, even contemplate (strange loop-like), Spinoza's 'natura naturans sub specie durationis'. :fire:0. Deity (Boltzmann brain?) ...
1. Deity becomes – fluctuates until symmetry breaks – not-Deity aka "planck universe".
2. "Non-planck universe" begins @maximum degrees temperature and rapidly – explosively ("Big Bang") – expands as it cools off.
3. Cosmic + thermodynamic entropy. (WE ARE nowHERE.)
4. "Non-planck universe" ends eventually – dissipates completely – having become an absolute zero degrees vacuum.
5. Absolute zero degrees vacuum – unbroken symmetry restored – is indistinguishable from Deity.
0. "Omega point" > the universe (or multiverse) constitutes memories (or dreaming) of Deity (Boltzmann brain?) — 180 Pro0f's *pandeist fairytale* (in sum)
I can't parse how a deity becomes one or merges with the universe? Do you mean like a cyborg, one of the predicted futures of humanity when man and machine become symbionts? — TheMadFool
↪Gnomon
The link in my previous post sketches where my conception of pandeism (xaos redux) deviates from Chardin / Tipler's omega point (cosmic telos). — 180 Proof
That description sounds like the God's Debris story, in which the deity, due to a bad case of eternal ennui, made like an Islamic suicide bomber, and blew herself into smithereens. Except that in this case, the "debris" is not simply splattered blood & guts, but is our complexly evolving universe. Which, instead of dissipating into thin air (xaos redux), has developed into the highly organized & beloved world of living thinking beings, in which we now live & breathe & sh*t & love.This is the basis of pandeism: the deity annihilates itself by becoming the universe in order to experience not being the deity. The end of time, maximum universal expansion, "heat death", etc is the deity reborn? Works for me, closes the eternal loop ouroboros-like. If I was in need of such a (minimal) metaphysical extravagance, I'd be a committed pandeist. — 180 Proof
It's all good (as the kids say). :up:Sorry. I seem to have wandered off into sermonizing. :roll: — Gnomon
In Teilhard deChardin's Omega Point, the future-god was imagined as the prophesied return of The Cosmic Christ. But his fellow Catholics were not impressed by his tainting of Faith with scientific evidence. First century Christians expected Jesus to return in their lifetime. So the idea of a trillion year delay is not very supportive of fragile Faith.Ultimately, in the very distant future, God will come into existence (The Omega Point). — TheMadFool
:ok: ... very Hegel and Bergson, Whitehead and Heidegger, and perhaps David Bohm too, which seems, IMO, an idealist analogue for the epicurean-spinozist pandeism I've proposed (mostly woo-free) above.My own worldview is also based on the axiom of an eternal creative force. but remains agnostic about the deity's specific intentions [1]. I label that model as "PanEnDeism" because our current understanding of physics is information-centric. In that case, both the Creator (Enformer) and the Creation (Enformed) are essentially the same stuff : infinite Potential-to-Be. And Evolution is the creative work of enforming, as performed by EnFormAction. In other words, it's all Information from Energy to Matter to Mind, and from Alpha to Omega.
That said, I still must label myself as Agnostic, because my personal worldview is just an educated guess, not a revealed prophecy. And it's not beholden to any religious tradition. So, this rather abstract model of Reality does not provide any of the emotionally appealing mythical elements, that would serve as a popular religion. It's more along the lines of Plato's LOGOS, and Lao Tse's TAO :meh: — Gnomon
For our descendents' sakes, let's hope not. I think 'human-level artificial intelligence' without any unnecessary atavistic, evolutionary-baggage like the metacognitive bottleneck of "affective self-awareness" would be optimal.... 'mysterians' ... who believe that no computer, of the kind we know how to build, will ever become self-aware and acquire the creative powers of the human mind.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.