While it's true that most don't know much about AI, I don't believe I can fall into that category even slightly (not that it should matter). Furthermore, the understanding of what the mind is and isn't reveals much more than the speculation of "modern science" on the progression of human technology.
I agree that there is certainly a threat to the reckless creation of devices, but this issue is not novel or new. Must I mention the generation of phone zombies to illustrate this point? Or the previous generation of TV zombies? Or perhaps the failure of 'voting technology' (malicious or not)? Maybe the introduction of unnecessary pharmaceuticals, or methods of "healing" by which the body is injected with terrible poison for months on end? How about advanced weaponry, unmanned drones, nuclear bombs? This issue has always and will always exist, and we are currently living in its consequences. It has only to get worse -- which is a matter of degree -- not of kind. And if the sages of old had any real insight (which I personally believe they did), we're due for another 428,000 years of overall descent into worse and worse consequences (though fortunately, there are infinite cycles within cycles, and smaller are those of 'dark ages' and 'renaissance').
My point was this:
To assert that a device can out-think the human mind in every way is to blatantly show ones ignorance about Mind, and reveal that the "mind" of such a speaker is trapped in a very small box of materialistic biases.
Men are children of God; living and breathing. Even the best imitation of such a creation by humans will only ever be a facsimile of life: never the real thing. Humans cannot create consciousness, they can only extend their own. These two ought never be conflated.
While it's true that most don't know much about AI, I don't believe I can fall into that category even slightly. Furthermore, the understanding of what the mind is and isn't reveals much more than the speculation of "modern science" on the progression of human technology.
I agree that there is certainly a threat to the reckless creation of devices, but this issue is not novel or new. Must I mention the generation of phone zombies to illustrate this point? Or the previous generation of TV zombies? Or perhaps the failure of 'voting technology' (malicious or not)? Maybe the introduction of unnecessary pharmaceuticals, or methods of "healing" by which the body is injected with terrible poison for months on end? How about advanced weaponry, unmanned drones, nuclear bombs? This issue has always and will always exist, and we are currently living in its consequences. It has only to get worse -- which is a matter of degree -- not of kind. And if the sages of old had any real insight (which I personally believe they did), we're due for another 428,000 years of overall descent into worse and worse consequences (though fortunately, there are infinite cycles within cycles, and smaller are those of 'dark ages' and 'renaissance').
My point was this:
To assert that a device can out-think the human mind in every way is to blatantly show ones ignorance about Mind, and reveal that the "mind" of such a speaker is trapped in a very small box of materialistic biases.
Men are children of God; living and breathing. Even the best imitation of such a creation by humans will only ever be a facsimile of life: never the real thing. Humans cannot create consciousness, they can only extend their own. These two ought never be conflated.