Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

vatican.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 513 posts

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#491

Post by cratermoon »

carlosjobim wrote: post #108
thrance wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Singularitarianism [1] is a very real phenomenon, if a bit niche. I have seen some people online put genuine faith in AGI existing soon and solving essentially everything that is wrong on Earth and in their lives. I don't think this is harmful because it may be "idolatry", but rather because, like real religion, it is often a substitute for actually improving one's situation or fighting for a better world. The idea o…

> it is often a substitute for actually improving one's situation or fighting for a better world. You just defined idolatry and why it is harmful. Idolatry is the worship of man-made things or other things that do not deserve worship. Including worshipping the government, which is the religion of most people. It is a false path.

Idolizing the Free Market™ and private enterprise is also a false path.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#492

Post by cynicalpeace »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #381
cynicalpeace wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but the point is that they'd have a firm moral foundation for that opinion, as opposed to the secular position, which will be dubious either way, letting it play out in a culture war.

If you are asserring that only Christianity provides a firm moral foundation, I suspect people of many other faiths would disagree.

I said nothing of the sort.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#493

Post by nickburns »

ben_w wrote: post #454
nickburns wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All 'unpluggable.' It's a metaphor.

Most people have a hard time unplugging from social media, despite widespread distrust of big tech. Can't unplug from banking, even when literally communists (literally literally, I've met some proud of being communists, they still got a mortgage). Coal and petroleum-based fuels are slowly getting unplugged, but the issues were known over a century ago, and the transition only became relevant scale when the alternati…

The context of simply unplugging it, would be if "AI" or "AGI" (as we currently understand the concept) were to turn on humanity.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#494

Post by codr7 »

glenstein wrote: post #435
codr7 wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Experience is biological, analog, computers are digital; that's the core of the problem. It doesn't matter how many samples you take, it's still not the full experience. Witness Vinyl.

This is just so story more than it's an actual argument and I would say it's exactly the kind of essentialism that I was talking about previously. In fact, the version of the argument typically put forward by Anglo-sphere philosophers, and in this case, by the Vatican, are actually more nuanced. The reference to the "embodied" nature of cognition at least introduces a concept that supports a meaningful argument that…

That's not a very good answer, imho.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#495

Post by codr7 »

Eisenstein wrote: post #479
smogcutter wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> claims no authority It should be obvious what authority is implicit in a document from the vatican .

You don't understand what I am saying. It has the authority to make a decision about these questions but it doesn't claim that authority and do it. It could state 'intelligence is only something humans can have because we have God's authority to say so', but instead tries to use science and philosophy to make those claims. This doesn't work, because everyone else is trying the same thing and it is just a mire since t…

I don't really care about decisions; I care about truth and wisdom, and there is plenty to be found in this document.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#496

Post by teeth-gnasher »

svieira wrote: post #330
teeth-gnasher wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea of Hell most popular is the “eternal conscious torment” view, which gives us the “don’t be bad or you’ll burn in Hell forever” perspective. That’s fairly new, and several other interpretations are just as biblical as it, if not more. Your quote for instance doesn’t explain what happens after the weeping and gnashing of teeth, some believe you become reunited with the Lord, others believe you are eliminated f…

"And the one who was seated on the throne said, “See, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this, for these words are trustworthy and true.” Then he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give water as a gift from the spring of the water of life. Those who conquer will inherit these things, and I will be their God and they will be my childre…

other reply got auto-dead for some reason? leaving out the link this time.

The passage from revelation again says nothing of eternity, the word death is rather absolute - the case would be much stronger if it finished “… which is where they suffer without end”. As for the parable, the passage states that his imprisonment was “until he could repay his debts”. This suggests he may be able to repay them eventually, at which point he’ll be free. It could be interpreted that after an appropriate amount of time spent experiencing the punishment of fire, perhaps until the balance is settled for whatever your transgressions were, you will no longer being in the fire. Blasphemy against the Spirit is an interesting case, I could see potentially that one class of transgressors being sentenced to eternal punishment. Alternatively, it could be saying that one who blasphemed against the Spirit has had their heart hardened so much that they will never seek forgiveness, and therefor will never get it. Their end isn’t specified here. In all this I’m not saying that the “eternal conscious torment” perspective is wrong, just that there are other interpretations which are just as based. If you have the time, I highly recommend the “Three Views of Hell” lecture series^, which goes into far more detail than I could manage here, including going through every verse in the Bible which speaks of anything related to what we now consider “Hell”.

^search “the narrow path” for the three views of hell lecture.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#497

Post by Eisenstein »

codr7 wrote: post #495
Eisenstein wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't understand what I am saying. It has the authority to make a decision about these questions but it doesn't claim that authority and do it. It could state 'intelligence is only something humans can have because we have God's authority to say so', but instead tries to use science and philosophy to make those claims. This doesn't work, because everyone else is trying the same thing and it is just a mire since t…

I don't really care about decisions; I care about truth and wisdom, and there is plenty to be found in this document.

The document is just a summary of a bunch of arguments and assertions that have yet to be proven either way. Every single thing they state as a given can be stated as not being a given just as convincingly. If they had claimed religious authority to make those statements at least it would have meaning. I am glad you found wisdom in it, but anyone familiar with the debate over a necessary biological basis for intelligence will find it unconvincing.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#498

Post by boxed »

computerthings wrote: post #81
boxed wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that a belief in god(s) makes you less prepared for a world with AI. In Buddhism the attitude is more sane: gods are just being that can be wrong too and ultimately suffer and cause suffering, the same as the rest of us. They might just be more strongly self-deluded (wink wink the pope wink wink)

Well, it's not the Catholic Church worshiping AI as the savior of humanity. I have seen no indication that those who do are particularly religious, either, what do you base that on? And hey, when it comes to fallible Gods, ancient Greek mythology is also pretty wild.

Sure. But they do worship something else, with disastrous bad choices as a consequence. Garbage in, garbage out.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#499

Post by carlosjobim »

cratermoon wrote: post #491
carlosjobim wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is often a substitute for actually improving one's situation or fighting for a better world. You just defined idolatry and why it is harmful. Idolatry is the worship of man-made things or other things that do not deserve worship. Including worshipping the government, which is the religion of most people. It is a false path.

Idolizing the Free Market™ and private enterprise is also a false path.

That's called Mammon and is well known idolatry.

Re: Antiqua et Nova: Note on the relationship between AI and human intelligence

#500

Post by boxed »

achierius wrote: post #97
boxed wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that a belief in god(s) makes you less prepared for a world with AI. In Buddhism the attitude is more sane: gods are just being that can be wrong too and ultimately suffer and cause suffering, the same as the rest of us. They might just be more strongly self-deluded (wink wink the pope wink wink)

It often feels to me that HN's view of Buddhism is "whatever bits of philosophy I happen to agree with". It's true that throughout history, there have been enough different expressions of Buddhism, practiced by at least a few people, that it's possible to say a lot of things 'are Buddhism', but it feels dishonest to me to rely on that in comparative analysis with a much more doctrinally stable religion. The differenc…

That's true. Pure Land buddhism is quite crazy if you look at the basic writings in buddhism. And you're correct in that buddhism can't protect its trademark as it were, like Catholicism can. But on the other hand, Chrisianity or Islam also can't, with funny situations like Unitarian Universalists who are, as far as I can tell, basically not christian in any meaningful way. Or in the case of Islam you get everyone saying everyone else is a heretic and people trying to kill each other.

In this respect, the Catholic Church got it right with the concept of excommunication.

Post reply on HN