Philosophical Speculations

Ben Iscatus wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 2:45 pm BK thinks abiogenesis is possible in principle, but that it would look like metabolising life (this being the extrinsic image of conscious inner life). There is a good very recent discussion with Brian Ford.

Hedge90 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:36 pm At first glance this seemed logical, but as I thought a bit about it, I don't get why it would be impossible to create sentient AI. In Bernardo's view, life is a dissociation when experienced from the 1st person view, and an objectification of a mental state when experienced from the 3nd person view. But why would this preclude the possibility of us producing such dissociation by artificial means? We are doing it all the time via biological procreation, which is the natural process of it, but why would it be impossible to figure out a way to do it without sexy time?
Of course I get it that it's not going to happen in the way that AI researches currently expect it to happen, i.e. by merely expanding computational capacities to a certain point, where sentience should magically appear. I get that. But unless I'm missing something, it is not logical to postulate that it cannot happen by any other means.

those who are raised into eternal life also become responsible for redeeming those who are 'dead'.

Hedge90 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:36 pm At first glance this seemed logical, but as I thought a bit about it, I don't get why it would be impossible to create sentient AI. In Bernardo's view, life is a dissociation when experienced from the 1st person view, and an objectification of a mental state when experienced from the 3nd person view. But why would this preclude the possibility of us producing such dissociation by artificial means? We are doing it all the time via biological procreation, which is the natural process of it, but why would it be impossible to figure out a way to do it without sexy time?
Of course I get it that it's not going to happen in the way that AI researches currently expect it to happen, i.e. by merely expanding computational capacities to a certain point, where sentience should magically appear. I get that. But unless I'm missing something, it is not logical to postulate that it cannot happen by any other means.

AshvinP wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 11:31 pm

Hedge90 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:36 pm At first glance this seemed logical, but as I thought a bit about it, I don't get why it would be impossible to create sentient AI. In Bernardo's view, life is a dissociation when experienced from the 1st person view, and an objectification of a mental state when experienced from the 3nd person view. But why would this preclude the possibility of us producing such dissociation by artificial means? We are doing it all the time via biological procreation, which is the natural process of it, but why would it be impossible to figure out a way to do it without sexy time?
Of course I get it that it's not going to happen in the way that AI researches currently expect it to happen, i.e. by merely expanding computational capacities to a certain point, where sentience should magically appear. I get that. But unless I'm missing something, it is not logical to postulate that it cannot happen by any other means.

Another way to consider what I wrote above - what is this "3rd person view" that BK relies on to formulate 'objective idealism'? There is no such thing. But everyone in the modern age began feeling that this non-existent perspective was necessary to have "objective" truth. Why? Because the role of Thinking in the world processes was diminished and nearly eliminated. It was felt that the relational meaning discerned by Thinking cannot be the sound basis for objectively verifiable processes. But there is no logical basis for that feeling. In fact, all systematic inquiries presuppose the opposite, but have simply abstracted out so far from concrete Thinking that the presupposition has been practically forgotten, which relates to Cleric's latest post about Memory as thinking-gestures in the other thread. Scientific endeavors of humanity practically conduct symphonies by thinking-gestures without realizing or remembering doing so. The progressions towards 'sentient AI' is a stark reminder of how abstracted Thinking has become - if we fail to see this dynamic of Spirit (Thinking) at work in the world, then we are basically seeking to transfer our own Thinking into machine entities so that they can do all the "thinking" for us. We can already see that happening around us to a great extent. AI algorithms already know much more about our subconscious soul-life than we do.

Hedge90 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 02, 2022 1:36 pm At first glance this seemed logical, but as I thought a bit about it, I don't get why it would be impossible to create sentient AI. In Bernardo's view, life is a dissociation when experienced from the 1st person view, and an objectification of a mental state when experienced from the 3nd person view. But why would this preclude the possibility of us producing such dissociation by artificial means? We are doing it all the time via biological procreation, which is the natural process of it, but why would it be impossible to figure out a way to do it without sexy time?
Of course I get it that it's not going to happen in the way that AI researches currently expect it to happen, i.e. by merely expanding computational capacities to a certain point, where sentience should magically appear. I get that. But unless I'm missing something, it is not logical to postulate that it cannot happen by any other means.