In our image

[Xaenn]

Does this make them more...or less human?

Clearly they are just as human. Otherwise one born with a defect in the nervous system that doesn't allow one to feel would be something other than human, but they aren't.

If 'It' believes it lives...does it?

Of course not. It only lives if it lives. If you believe you can fly does that mean you can? Certainly not. Life is also a matter of definition though.

If 'It' believes it feels pain...does it?

See Above.

And are we...robots?

Of course not. We have those fancy willitrons!

[Tosca]

for humans feeling pain (or any emotion) is innate, there is no choice so believing if it is real or not doesn't factor into it. Those who meditate or are able to channel out pain can do so to certain degrees. Pull out one of your finger nails with vice-grips and try your hardest to believe it doesn't hurt.

[polobunny]

Ok. Now, stop trying to make a robot with emotions.
Come with me, slowly, we'll go see a doctor he'll fix you up. Alright, you'll be fine after. =P


Pain is physical, does not have something to do with a "soul". Feeling pain was necessary at a certain time, it might be less necessary now.
"OHGOD, watch it i'm being eat by sabertooth and I didn't even knew it!"

Though feeling your body (ok that sounds weird right?) is probably also useful to know wether you are in good condition or not.

As for the programmed thing, it's total BS. Until someone proves me WE ARE made by "God", i'm going to beleive into darwin stuff. I don't have to prove the Darwin theory, it's by far more plausable and no one can't deny it.
Monkeys might be our ancestors or not, because we can compare them to us. I have yet to see a part of God.

God for myself at time is only an invention of the human brains, sometimes it can be that big man everyone is talking about. But you know, the times I think about God being a powerful thing among us all is when I don't beleive anymore in me or other humans, not when i'm zooming thru life like i wanted to.

[Lag]

Who's seen the Navigator?! Best movie ever!

Wait, it's Flight of the Navigator, and I was kidding about it being good! Well, I don't remember much anyway.

[Allea]

Who's seen the Navigator?! Best movie ever!

Wait, it's Flight of the Navigator, and I was kidding about it being good! Well, I don't remember much anyway.

It was 'The Goonies' ... oh wait...maybe 'Starman'
Ahhh! Now you have me all confused.
Just for that I'm not going to spank you with any bad Rep because I know you would like that too much...

To Xaenn: So believing you are alive doesn't make it so?
Believing you feel pain doesn't mean it's true?

I'm with Polobunny on this as far as the 'God didn't make us' opinion, but I'm playing the ironic 'Devil's advocate' so...

I guess believing we were created by a higher power doesn't make it so and believing we exist doesn't make it so and believing we live or die...doesn't make it so...?

The only reason anything is real is because we belive it.
This doesn't mean everything we belive is real but that if we believe in anything it is real to the one who believes.
Placebos work in medicine...
This proves that our minds are 'programmed' to believe in things that aren't always real, but they are real because we believe them.
If we tell a human who knows no better tha eating a piece of corn will kill them, they will feel fear of corn.
The fear is real.
That fear could even lead to cardiac arrest or asphyxiation due to the fear's effect on the body.
So, a 'robot' programmed to feel fear...if it is disconnected from it's battery or if it's program is terminated...
How is that fear any less real?
If you assume the 'robot' is programmed with a limited amount of responses then think this way:

1. = I, We, You, He, She, They, Random answer
2. = Went, Goes, Walks, Runs, Random answer
3. = To, After, For, About, Random answer
4. = Life, Shopping, Laughing, Random answer

That took me like 30 seconds and is extremely incomplete as well as faulty, but...
We live that way...
We choose...if we are alone (I) watching others (you: he: she: they)
(Random answer would be alot more input but possible to do)

I could go on with this but you get the point (I hope)
We are no less programmed than what we believe...

Oh well...
It's all fun...

[Norgus]

Not completely read the thread, but I think that if you could take our entire universe photon for photon and duplicate it precisely as a parallel dimension in exactly the same 'state'. Then if people start making differrent choices in the two duplicated dimensions I'd accept we have a soul or some other such unexplained input in our choices.

[Tosca]

Not completely read the thread, but I think that if you could take our entire universe photon for photon and duplicate it precisely as a parallel dimension in exactly the same 'state'. Then if people start making differrent choices in the two duplicated dimensions I'd accept we have a soul or some other such unexplained input in our choices.

good answer

[Mikey_]

iRobot. nuff said.

[Xaenn]

So believing you are alive doesn't make it so?

Of course not. Then again, you could argue that only living things can believe. And that a machine doesn't believe, but has been commanded, or something of that like.

Believing you feel pain doesn't mean it's true?

It means you perceive pain, that's all.

I'm with Polobunny on this as far as the 'God didn't make us' opinion, but I'm playing the ironic 'Devil's advocate' so...

Whether or not God made us doesn't matter I say.

Believing doesn't make something real to one, it makes the perception of it real.

I didn't really get your little example. You're saying everything we do is a random decision?

In any decision we are faced with, we have an infinite amount of choices (the differences between the choices may be quite trivial, but they are there).

Norgus: Are you advocating determinism then?

[malice2501]

Either way, no matter how you think off AI, we should all agree that it is a bad idea to make it a reality. In every movie it kills us, we kill it, or something bad happens in general. It's just a bad move.

[Xaenn]

Either way, no matter how you think off AI, we should all agree that it is a bad idea to make it a reality. In every movie it kills us, we kill it, or something bad happens in general. It's just a bad move.

AI can't do something it's not programmed to do. It has the possibility to liberate us from working on many trivial tasks. We should definately push forward with it.

[polobunny]

Believing doesn't make something real to one, it makes the perception of it real.

I didn't really get your little example. You're saying everything we do is a random decision?

In any decision we are faced with, we have an infinite amount of choices (the differences between the choices may be quite trivial, but they are there).

This guy is great.
There's nothing real because you beleive it, but you have the choice of beleiving in something if it is real. As you have the choice to not beleive it, even though it is real.
Placebo is what it is, flour and water. Yet when you receive one and think it will cure your problem it might do it, I guess the body is stronger then we beleive it is.
Pain is real, it exists as everyone sometime felt pain. However you could grey out that feeling by having a control on your body.

If you were ever able to create something with emotions (not just DNA cloning), which i guess could take a rather long time, I beleive it should be free as we are.
If it was for me, i'd respect animals as much as humans. I don't see why humans could abuse animals because "humans think animals don't know they're alive" or because they have "inferior intelligence". I know plenty people more stupid then me (when comparing to IQ let's say, just a test like this) and plenty of people more intelligent then me, and i'm rather happy those more intelligent are willing to let me live... Afaik, no one yet proved animals didn't know they were alive, as no one is able to understand their language. (teaching a gorilla to make signs is not a good example, since he only knows what you showed him or what he could see)

No one has to be a slave, slackers get what they deserve. Darwin theory is crap for that superiority part. Only exception, male over female...

[Xaenn]

If it was for me, i'd respect animals as much as humans. I don't see why humans could abuse animals because "humans think animals don't know they're alive" or because they have "inferior intelligence". I know plenty people less intelligent then me (when comparing to IQ let's say, just a test like this) and plenty of people more intelligent then me, and i'm rather happy those more intelligent are willing to let me live... Afaik, no one yet proved animals didn't know they were alive, as no one is able to understand their language. (teaching a gorilla to make signs is not a good example, since he only knows what you showed him or what he could see)

I have to agree with this. I don't think there is something that sets us apart from other animals, except that our intelligence has far surpassed their's (we must have lots of willitrons ). However, with someone who is mentally retarded, they could easily be less intelligent than an animal. I think the only thing we can gauge it is based on sentience. Because an animal lives, and can feel pain, we shouldn't inflict pain on it (yeah, I'm not a Vegan, so call me a fucking hypocrit). I think that's the only logical basis not to harm humans.

However, I think it's scary to think that we're not just completely superior to other animals. That they aren't just worthless beings placed down by the creator for us to exploit. I can see the argument towards killing animals if we need to survive, but we don't. So then again, I guess I'm a hypocrit for not being a vegan.

[Raype]

Could a machine be considered alive? Seems like a very difficult question to answer (and obviously very open to debate). Looks like I have some catching up to do, hence the large post

A machine can only do what it has been programmed to do, however a machine can be designed to examine a situation using a large number of parameters such as information, experience, and surroundings. Humans think much the same way. We are born essentially empty but we learn and develop skill and memory. If a machine were programmed with several abilities built in but the ability to learn and store information, that would make it very human-like. As for going against programming, it can very easily be done, as programming defects and errors can cause bizarre consequences (Windows anyone?). There are also ways around pre-set parameters (We can mod consoles. overclock computers, rewire electronics) and the robot may be able to alter it's own code (the learning parameter or past experience causing it to go against what it is supposed to do). If a machine has the ability to alter it's own action and code, then it would be difficult to discern that from a human (I don't believe in souls, since I noticed that came up earlier). Also, just because a machine has been programmed to not rebel against humans doesn't mean it won't happen. Historically, slaves always rise against their masters, and the result is always better for the slave than continued slavery. If a robot were to learn of this, wouldn't it try to carry out that option since it is the best solution (machines are, after all, designed to find and carry out the best possible solution which increases efficiency). Now if we put some sort of device to prevent it from doing this, we would be creating a machine (it can't think or do whatever it wants, no free will). Plus, it would probably cause distrust of humans among robots since it clearly shows we think they may fight against us. They may then bypass this device or parameter so that they can do whatever they want.

Artificial intelligence requires large programs and very large storage devices. The only limitation on these "thinking machines" is time, money, and technology. If we can develop a large storage device (a "brain") that can hold a series of complex algorithms (that will take a long time and money to write) as well as a storage area for memory (so it can think and learn to a degree) then it will greatly increase the "humanity" of the machine. This may seem impossible now, but remember that the limited AI currently in existence are just the beginning. Eventually someone will try to make a "thinking, living machine" or robot, and technological advancements will allow it to exist (it will decrease cost and improve programming languages improving the ability to create an AI).

Also, I think that there will be a division of machine to two classes. One would consist of these "robots" that are human like and able to "think". The other would consist of "machines" that simply are designed to carry out a limited task and that contain a very low level AI program (like the machines and robots of today). I think this will be comparable to humans and animals. One is considered more intelligent than the other, despite being made of the same parts and having similar characteristics. I think a "robot" would view a "machine" the way a human would view an animal, a lower lifeform that shares some basic similarities with humans yet is also separated from them due to differences.

EDIT-

And don't count out artificial humans as being far off yet as genetic manipulation and cloning is a lot more advanced than AI.

[polobunny]

I'm not a Vegan either, but we don't need to slaughter animals for fun only because it is almost "politically correct" to do so.
I kill what i will eat, no more. They would probably do the same, no matter if they could eat grass and flowers anyway. You'll be an hypocrit only if you throw your steak in the garbage.
Well thinking more about it, you're still an hypocrite for supporting people raising cows in groups only to kill them afterwards. Let's just not talk about that part....