Re: simple, plain-English introduction?

Brian Janko wrote: 
Do the concepts of souls or the spiritual ever enter much into these
discussions?  I'm not meaning that sarcastically.  It would be
impossible to define a "soul" in scientific/computer terms, but if it
were the basis of consciousness, then all scientific attempts to
recreate a conscious machine would ultimately fail, no matter how high
the level of achievement.

(The way I'm thinking of "soul" is sort of like the "homunculus"
argument which I've read about, usually with the assumption that it
implies infinite regress.  I don't see why this would be so.  A "soul"
could be of a different nature that IS consciousness and doesn't need
to have a man behind the man, ad infinitum.)

I realize this is less satisfying, since it would be impossible to
actually prove the soul.  But impossible to prove doesn't mean that it
is not so.  I just means it's not verifiable.

Thanks for all your input so far.

Brian

Well, aside from Ray Kurzweil's book "The Age of Spiritual Machine", I think most fans of AI are loath to put the cart too far ahead of the horse. It seems to me that spirituality is the creation/discovery of a set of beliefs that attempt to explain our role in the cosmos (and often, our relationship with the creator of the cosmos). I think few of us are eager to cross that bridge before other nearer (shorter, lower) bridges have been spanned (like problem solving, learning, memory, development of belief hierarchies, etc).

But As I mentioned in my response to "Miss Elaine Eos" today, it makes sense to me (at this late hour) that consciousness may be a necessary precursor to spirituality, since my cursory definition for consciousness is something like "self-awareness". This also seems like it would be the first step toward asking questions that would occur to any intelligent being such as, "If I exist, and my actions can affect others, then how should I act? What actions would then be right or wrong?"

It also seems like self-awareness would lead to asking spiritual questions like "Who am I? How did I get here? Why am I here?"

But are such questions inevitable among all intelligent agents? I think past AI researchers have suggested that IAs could be constructed that would not be inclined toward self-examination. In Alan Newell's parlance, such an agent would possess a "Central Executive" that seeks to address some goals (lower) and not others (higher).

Perhaps curiosity is not necessary for intelligence?

    Randy
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: simple, plain-English introduction?
    ... impossible to define a "soul" in scientific/computer terms, ... implies infinite regress. ... could be of a different nature that IS consciousness and doesn't need ...
    (comp.ai.alife)
  • CHAPTER XXII (Tertium Organum)
    ... Knowledge by means of the expansion of consciousness as a reality. ... Influence of nature on the soul of man. ... influence which religion and philosophy may exercise on the human mind. ... what I call the Infinite in Nature. ...
    (soc.culture.indonesia)
  • Islamic Concepts
    ... How do you see the connection between Allah, spirit, ... the soul and the body? ... regard as objective and ignores consciousness and that which they regard as ... mind and spirit; ...
    (soc.religion.islam)
  • Re: Furqan as used in Quran 25:1
    ... CONSCIOUSNESS: "Consciousness" can be defined as the mental state ... mind and heart. ... Cf. the soul (ruh). ...
    (soc.religion.islam)
  • Re: The Presumptuousness of Atheism
    ... And, BTW, Jesus has an eternal existance. ... From what I have been able to establish the word "soul" is the religious word for what the rest of us would recognise by the word "consciousness". ... It is those who seek to selectively disregard some aspects of the evidence that I regard as evil - as I know to the cost of my soul/consciouness. ...
    (alt.religion.christian)