Joshthefirst:

But humans have more than natural intelligence. They have consciousness and supreme self awareness and rational thought and will.
Humans have spirit. Soul. This is not physical.
This cannot be inculcated into non-living things.

Don't confuse Consciousness for a Thing, its a sense/channel of self awareness, it is relational to a subject (we). Souls and Spirits are entities/objects for themselves.

wiegraf:

Yes, except intent in our case is subtly complex.



Obviously most don't think so. I clearly do, no?



How can nothingness be disordered? That asides, both.

so machines arise from complex nothingness?

Okay.
Clarify intent.
Do machines have intent?
Are machines conscious?

plaetton:

Do you agree that all the above emotions are induced by electro-chemical reactions in the brain, and thus can be artificially induced and manipulated at will?

If you no, then you are too ignorant and ill-informed for this discussion.

If yes, then why do you think such emotions cannot be electrically induced also?

Dumb, dumber and dumbfounded?
Consider that as your new moniker.






WANTED: Intelligent arguments from Deepsight!

Seriously, seriously ,and jokes apart.

I am in shock and awe.

You have contributed nothing intelligent to this thread but scoff, scoff and scoff.

I am tired.

Although Okexyz might be coming from far left field, but at least he is making a sincere effort, for which I commend and respect him.
Have you become so lazy that you cannot even mount a credible rebuttal?

You have fallen below the "silly " threshold.

Until you step up your game from this motor park mental zone, I am going to ignore you, albeit, with a sad and dejected face.

Gosh. As predicted. No disappointment whatsoever.

Well perhaps it misses you that for emotions to be induced, there must first be a person feeling them. Which will not be the case with your robots.

I will indulge you. Once and finally.

But for now, chew on pain, sight, emotion, independent and original thought, discomfort, and the like, and distinguish the simulation from the sensation in each of these cases.

Your turn out here is the most remarkably fo.oolish and ignorant ever.

As I said, I will indulge you.

Kay 17:

Don't confuse Consciousness for a Thing, its a sense/channel of self awareness, it is relational to a subject (we). Souls and Spirits are entities/objects for themselves.

I do not confuse consciousness for "a thing"
Consciousness is an attribute. I believe its a given attribute.

Joshthefirst: I do not confuse consciousness for "a thing"
Consciousness is an attribute. I believe its a given attribute.

Ponder "what am I"......

Sums it all.

PhenomenonVFX:

okay I didnt see this before my first reply to u.
Let me break things down further.
There is something called Run-time game playing or so. I cant remember exactly now. This is when a computer actually learns the rules for interaction with opponents after the game has started. Now it is about a computer learning whatsoever rule a game is working with by using techniques far beyond statistical AI.
Now back to preprogrammed computers. The day a preprogrammed computer begins to function beyond the limits of its programming and probably possess an ability to reprogram itself, that will be the day.
Now I consider the above in the realm of quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is bizzare and almost "spiritual" to some people. In that realm of physics, it is said that even the human mind can affect the outcome. It provides us with even a higher probability of computers running beyond the limits of their programming.
Lets look at evolution for instance. It can be argued that evolution is just another way whereby living organisms run beyond the limits of their "program" in order to survive. They improvise new genetic codes and adaptation for continuity.
Imagine the future where we have computers running on giga or tera-qubits of processing power. Also using stochastic and non-deterministic execution techniques unlike the computers of nowadays. Would it be possible for them to run beyond the limits of their programming which has quantum possibilities, reprogram themselves and suddenly be possible for the machines to come alive and say "corgito, ergo sum!!!"? Well I dont know. But some scientists seem to think so. They even believe it will be possible to transfer human consciousness into machines.

U really should try reading Xenocide. It gives a mind-boggling treatise about how consciousness can be formed in an artificial network connection.

There is alot of dogmatic foolishness in the propagation of ill understood quantum concepts. Such as that with the arrantly f.oolish contention that virtual particles in a quantum vacuum are evidence that something may arise from nothing - even when it is proven fact that there is no perfect vacuum anywhere - and as such, no "nothing" in the first place.

It is frankly amusing.

Start - "what am I".

Joshthefirst: so machines arise from complex nothingness?

Okay.
Clarify intent.
Do machines have intent?

Let's say simply, yes. Does not mean they necessarily came to be for a purpose.

Joshthefirst:
Are machines conscious?

Again, we are machines.

wiegraf:

Let's say simply, yes. Does not mean they necessarily came to be for a purpose.



Again, we are machines.

.

And this farfer neither knows what a machine is, nor understands the evident fact that if indeed, we are machines, that in itself will clobber his atheistic philosophy into dirt - by the very definition of what a machine is, as something built for function. And an efficient end.

My word.

These fellas truly ring clinically dumb.

Well. As I said, cattle that you both are, you will be indulged.

wiegraf:

Let's say simply, yes. Does not mean they necessarily came to be for a purpose.



Again, we are machines.

okay,
I assume you speak indirectly. A machine has no choice but to fulfill the intents of its maker? Or rather, the intent of a machine is the intent of its maker?
What gives machines intent if not the machine makers?
Do machines have freewill?
Remember:
A machine is a tool containing one or more parts that uses energy to perform an intended action.

How can humans be machines and still have freewill, having their own intents and taking their own actions?

Machines have makers do they not?
And you cannot tell me that evolution is our maker, evolution itself does not have intent. Or does it?

Deep Sight: So much stupidity. Later.

Pain. A hint. Will a robot feel pain. Do Cameras see. Do Chess Computers think. Hints.

Well. Will be back once in front of a laptop.

What is obvious, like I earlier said, is that there is no difference between religious stupidity and atheistic stupidity.

Later.

I fail to see how feeling pain equates consciousness. Thinking, yes. Pain? No.

Also nobody has told u computers think. What we have said is that in the future with advances in neuroscience and quantum computational power, it could be possible that computers become thoughtful. Could be. Probability.
Somehow u seem to be conveniently omitting that in ur subsequent arguments.
Now unless u want to define consciousness in ur own terms or u can prove that it is impossible to create computers capable of thought.......these argument boils down to DeepSight's personal beliefs vs. Science. I will take science anyday.
Cheers.

PhenomenonVFX:

I fail to see how feeling pain equates consciousness. Thinking, yes. Pain? No.

Also nobody has told u computers think. What we have said is that in the future with advances in neuroscience and quantum computational power, it could be possible that computers become thoughtful. Could be. Probability.
Somehow u seem to be conveniently omitting that in ur subsequent arguments.
Now unless u want to define consciousness in ur own terms or u can prove that it is impossible to create computers capable of thought.......these argument boils down to DeepSight's personal beliefs vs. Science. I will take science anyday.
Cheers.

Nonsense.

I have yet to make any argument by the way. When I argue, you will know.

That aside, by what ridiculous presumption do you equate the idea of possible conscious robots with science ?? ?? ?? ??

As is obvious, you know nothing of the science of the matter, and have made a most ridiculous leap in aligning science with the psuedo futuristic psuedo intellectual nonsensical notion of self conscious robots.

PhenomenonVFX:

I fail to see how feeling pain equates consciousness..

HONESTLY SOMEONE TELL ME WHY ANYONE SHOULD TAKE THIS CLOWNISH STATEMENT SERIOUSLY? ? ?

Joshthefirst: okay,
I assume you speak indirectly. A machine has no choice but to fulfill the intents of its maker? Or rather, the intent of a machine is the intent of its maker?
What gives machines intent if not the machine makers?
Do machines have freewill?
Remember:
A machine is a tool containing one or more parts that uses energy to perform an intended action.

How can humans be machines and still have freewill, having their own intents and taking their own actions?

Machines have makers do they not?
And you cannot tell me that evolution is our maker, evolution itself does not have intent. Or does it?

The s.illy marijuana addict could not even see how the statement that humans are machines counters his atheism.

Deep Sight:

The s.illy marijuana addict could not even see how the statement that humans are machines counters his atheism.

Take it easy sir.
That's what I asked him first.
I'm still waiting for him to reply.

Joshthefirst:

Take it easy sir.
That's what I asked him first.
I'm still waiting for him to reply.

I wouldn't wait up, considering the deep and intense obtuseness on offer here.

Those conscious robots would probably consider some of the reta.rded posters here, robots.

And poorly engineered ones at that, good grief.

You sure say wiegraf never run commot?

Joshthefirst: okay,
I assume you speak indirectly. A machine has no choice but to fulfill the intents of its maker? Or rather, the intent of a machine is the intent of its maker?
What gives machines intent if not the machine makers?
Do machines have freewill?
Remember:
A machine is a tool containing one or more parts that uses energy to perform an intended action.

How can humans be machines and still have freewill, having their own intents and taking their own actions?

Machines have makers do they not?
And you cannot tell me that evolution is our maker, evolution itself does not have intent. Or does it?

An odd comment from a theist, considering your belief that God preconceived man as a vision prior to creating him for a purpose. Man is likened to a machine in that regard.

Joshthefirst: You sure say wiegraf never run commot?

To be fair to him, he has never pretended to be interested in being taken seriously, the reverse of Plaetton, who advertises perverse ignorance and stupidity with endearing confidence.

Kay 17:

An odd comment from a theist, considering your belief that God preconceived man as a vision prior to creating him for a purpose. Man is likened to a machine in that regard.

my belief is that God preconceived man for a purpose, yes. But God created man with freewill. Man has to choose to cooperate with God.
I'm trying to show wiegraf that even from his basis(which even contradicts his atheist beliefs), man cannot be considered as a machine. Man is not a machine.

Kay 17:

An odd comment from a theist, considering your belief that God preconceived man as a vision prior to creating him for a purpose. Man is likened to a machine in that regard.

Which is why an atheist therefore calling man a machine amounts to conceding purpose and intent, snd therefore conceding the existence of God, however described.

Whats going on here, are y'all rats, fraggles or something? I must be crazy, having an imaginary conversation with intoxicated rodents. . .

Deep Sight:

Which is why an atheist therefore calling man a machine amounts to conceding purpose and intent, snd therefore conceding the existence of God, however described.

Whats going on here, are y'all rats, fraggles or something? I must be crazy, having an imaginary conversation with intoxicated rodents. . .

Take it easy sir.

Maybe its too much stout and pepper soup.

Joshthefirst:
Take it easy sir.

Maybe its too much stout and pepper soup.

It just might be. Else there is no other explanation for the piffle on offer here. Someone says he cannot see how the experiencee of pain shows consciousness. Another person says that drugs induce emotions in people and as such emotions may be induced in a robot.

Ah. I accept. They didn't actually say these blasphemous and scandalously d.aft things.

It is rather the case, that I am drunk, and imagining these statements only.

Joshthefirst: okay,
I assume you speak indirectly. A machine has no choice but to fulfill the intents of its maker? Or rather, the intent of a machine is the intent of its maker?
What gives machines intent if not the machine makers?
Do machines have freewill?
Remember:
A machine is a tool containing one or more parts that uses energy to perform an intended action.

How can humans be machines and still have freewill, having their own intents and taking their own actions?

Machines have makers do they not?
And you cannot tell me that evolution is our maker, evolution itself does not have intent. Or does it?

A machine has no choice but to fulfill its programming. I never said we have freewill. We don't.

Nature's haphazard programming is responsible for you, evidence everywhere, see evolution. Exactly why should I discard it?

btw, following your beliefs the intent is clear; do god's will, no? So exactly how aren't humans machines?

DeepSight go home u are drunk.
U are just throwing tantrums around like a child and yet to say anything meaningful.

When u sober up, explain how pain is a sign of consciousness. And tell me what happens if a conscious animal loses its ability to feel pain. Does it lose its consciousness thus?

And yes transfering consciousness to robots is not pseudo scientific ramble. It has bases in sound science and has been supported by higher humans than u. You are yet to refute any claims made here soundly. Please do so.

Note: when u reply me, talk. Dont just ramble with childish petulance.

Deep Sight: .

And this farfer neither knows what a machine is, nor understands the evident fact that if indeed, we are machines, that in itself will clobber his atheistic philosophy into dirt - by the very definition of what a machine is, as something built for function. And an efficient end.

My word.

These fellas truly ring clinically dumb.

Well. As I said, cattle that you both are, you will be indulged.

Wait first, lemme get my umbrella up first...Ok

Ah, but there really isn't anything here to reply to. Humans are tools, built to handle a function, I agree (somewhat, though it's simplifying). Problem, where? No one said the programmer had to be conscious, no? And it obviously isn't

Joshthefirst: You sure say wiegraf never run commot?

Are you drunk as well?

wiegraf:

A machine has no choice but to fulfill its programming. I never said we have freewill. We don't.

Nature's haphazard programming is responsible for you, evidence everywhere, see evolution. Exactly why should I discard it?

btw, following your beliefs the intent is clear; do god's will, no? So exactly how aren't humans machines?

smh.
So does nature(or evolution) have intent or not?

So you aren't an atheist then? Since you believe that nature is the creator and God?

And, following the bible, Gods intent for creating man is to do His will. But man shows his freewill by either choosing or refusing to do Gods will.

wiegraf:

Wait first, lemme get my umbrella up first...Ok

Ah, but there really isn't anything here to reply to. Humans are tools, built to handle a function, I agree (somewhat, though it's simplifying). Problem, where? No one said the programmer had to be conscious, no? And it obviously isn't

who built humans wiegraf. I always thought you were an atheist. I didn't know you were just agnostic.

PhenomenonVFX: DeepSight go home u are drunk.
U are just throwing tantrums around like a child and yet to say anything meaningful.

When u sober up, explain how pain is a sign of consciousness. And tell me what happens if a conscious animal loses its ability to feel pain. Does it lose his consciousness thus?

And yes transfering consciousness to robots is not pseudo scientific ramble. It has bases in sound science and has been supported by higher humans than u. You are yet to refute any claims made here soundly. Please do so.

Note: when u reply me, talk. Dont just ramble with childish petulance.

All those non-sentient species that feel pain don't seem to exist...
Or folk born without the ability to feel pain..

He just makes flowery statements like that because they make him appear deep to sheeple, they don't necessarily make sense.

PhenomenonVFX: DeepSight go home u are drunk.
U are just throwing tantrums around like a child and yet to say anything meaningful.

When u sober up, explain how pain is a sign of consciousness. And tell me what happens if a conscious animal loses its ability to feel pain. Does it lose his consciousness thus?

And yes transfering consciousness to robots is not pseudo scientific ramble. It has bases in sound science and has been supported by higher humans than u. You are yet to refute any claims made here soundly. Please do so.

Note: when u reply me, talk. Dont just ramble with childish petulance.

Such s.illiness. of course the sensation of pain is a sure component of consciousness even when the loss of the sensation surely does not connote loss of consciousness.

This is so elementary, it is the reason new born bsbies are pinched to cry.

Drunk, I am, no doubt. We shall see on the morrow, and do present yourself for the duel. Do not shrink, for I shall be there.... waiting. ... conscious.... and even self conscious. ...

Joshthefirst: smh.
So does nature(or evolution) have intent or not?

So you aren't an atheist then? Since you believe that nature is the creator and God?

And, following the bible, Gods intent for creating man is to do His will. But man shows his freewill by either choosing or refusing to do Gods will.

Nature does not have a conscious intent. Blindly doing its thing through time.

The bolded is correct. Who said anything about god??

So according to your bible man uses energy to attain a goal. Exactly what is a machine again?

Joshthefirst: who built humans wiegraf. I always thought you were an atheist. I didn't know you were just agnostic.

Who says I'm agnostic? Don't use that dirty word to describe me. I've already told you who "built" humans.