Ok, so a little back ground is necessary for this one. I’m in the process of reading an article that my brother (the philosophy major aka. The Duke) gave me. It is a very interesting read especially now that the writer has gotten past discussing the scope of the paper (some 5 pages into it). The article is called “Computing Machinery and Intelligence” the author is Alan Turing. This is the guy that is attributed with much of swiftness of the last days of WWII. This is because this man invented one of the first digital computers and it was used extremely successfully to break the German’s “enigma code” (how I know this I have no idea). The incredible thing about this paper is that it was written in 1950 and analyzes in extreme depth the development of a “thinking machine” and addresses the question; “can a machine be built to think.” It is a broad question but I’m leaving it there because I feel like it would take to long to explain any more. Anyway it goes into counter arguments and deals this some theological aspects of the whole thing. There were a few lines that intrigued me a good deal that I thought I would share, and share my thoughts on them. I hate to take things out of context but I feel it can stand alone.
Turing (in counter to his own argument): “’Thinking is a function of man’s immortal soul. God has given an immortal soul to every man and woman, but not to any other animal or to machines.’”
Me: “Perhaps animals and machines do have souls they simple do not recognize it in themselves thus can not use it or any of its function such as thinking. In the end this seems to be a bad argument because it is dependant on belief and belief varies.”
Turing (in counter to argument for thoughtless animals): “It appears to me that the argument quoted above implies a serious restriction of the omnipotence of the Almighty. It admitted that there are certain things that He cannot do such as make one equal two.”
Me: “So often religious people put blocks in there mind on what their omnipotent God can do. He can do what every the hell he likes even if you can’t see it the way he does. I feel that people need to look for the dividing line between God’s creation and man’s creation. The concepts of 1 and 2 are creations of mankind not of God and only exist for mankind’s sake. People put to much power in the word of man’s creation.”
Turing (same as last): “In attempting to construct such [thinking] machines we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls He creates.”
Me: “This man is closer to God than most religious people I know.”
Turing (the next argument against his own argument): “’The consequences of machines thinking would be too dreadful. Let us hope and believe that they cannot do so.’”
Me: “No more dreadful than having a child. A super smart, super fast thinking child but a child none the less. Love it and it will love back. That is assuming that emotion and thought are closely related. An unemotional thinking matching would truly be dreadful when it realizes how superior it is to its creator.”
There so much more on just this one page of this article but I feel like I have wasted enough of your time. So I will leave you with the final thought that I wrote in the page of the article.
Me: “Wisdom in knowing in your heart that you know less that the rock on the mountain side. Be humble before God and all of his creation. For all of his creation is of him… is him.”
Always love everything. Let everything be from the heart. Make life art in all things and all thing art in life.
Dam I feel good.
