seph likes to talk philosophy, so lets talk....existance

likwidsageReligious views? I didn't know I had a religion. heh. I don't seem to see any religious views in anything I stated so please point out which statement you're talking about.Also, I hope no one takes this as an arguement, rather it should be seen more of a discussion where we gain knowledge and hopefully insight from on another.

I think after a certain point everything balls down to religon, even science.

1. The fact or state of existing; being.
2. The fact or state of continued being; life: our brief existence on Earth.
3.
a. All that exists: sang the beauty of all existence.
b. A thing that exists; an entity.
4. A mode or manner of existing: scratched out a meager existence.
5. Specific presence; occurrence: The Geiger counter indicated the existence of radioactivity.
DICTIONARY DEFINITIONplease don't start about religion the fact that its all based on bull**** (i'm not knocking it, religion is a good thing as it brings hope to lots of people ect but you can't use it in descusions as gods/jesus's exsistance is a hole other argument) and no everything doesn't boil down to religion especialy science as science is devoid of it and if it took any influence from it we would still be stupid. all through history religion has tryed to stop science as it fears the truth that science proved that half of what is said in the bible is bull (adem and eve theory) to get back to the original point
i think that is cool subject matter about the robot thing. i don't think anyone got what u ment.
if an A.I. was developed that completely thought for its self learnt and felt emotions whould it have an existance would it be seen as just a machine or be given rights as a sentiant being.
also what if your mind was downloaded to a robot and your body dies, so now you are a robot do you exist? no longer are u living as flesh and blood or are u alive u still think and feel just as you did befor
thats one to think about.

^ What he said.

equitypetey · #22and no everything doesn't boil down to religion especialy science as science is devoid of it and if it took any influence from it we would still be stupid. all through history religion has tryed to stop science as it fears the truth that science proved that half of what is said in the bible is bull (adem and eve theory)

Hehe, you think so wouldn't you. Sorry, I won't argue anymore, I won't go into the interconnectedness of religon and science. And also I believe that half of what the bible says IS bull. But Christianity is no the only religon in the world...I am muslim, and have read the english translation of it ( I can only read arabic, I don't understand it although i should.) The translations also have scientific back up from reknowned scientists around the world. This is just an example, but in the quran (like a bible for muslims) it actually states specifically the action in whcih milk is produced in a cow. (Don't ask me why) But its scientifically proved that the way stated in there is true. Also take into acount that the quran was written about 1500 years ago.When I read this i was completely amazed because i showed my dad the arabic quote and told him to translate it himself, and he said the same thing as the book translation.(PS: I can give you the quote, but you'll have to wait for my uncle to finish with it.)

i know the bible is not the only one i just used the bible as 80% of the world is christian (due to the fact that people went out to poor countrys and said u can eat if u belive in god) but most modern religions say almost the same thing as they were derived from the same place at the same time. the reason i think its bull is i'm not stupid. religion has been around since the dawn of man it was, has and will always be used as a position of power. christianity is 2007 years old what about the religions of the azteks greeks and so on now all seen as mytholigy but they were the belifs of people then they were no more proved or disproved as the modern ones. so what makes them myth. even some new ones are a bit far feched like scientoligy come on thats the most stupid load of bull anyone has ever belived in but people do belive and thats the pont its just something to do, give hope, support, a sense of being nothing more theres no factual bases. theres more prof that dragons exited than there is of jesus but dragons are not real.
again i'm not knocking it its a good thing (apart from all the wars the world have seen that are all because of it) and i respect people who belive in a grater power than them selves but just don't pull it in to a descussion that someone was talkin about robots LOL just talk about the bloody robots not god, unless u think god is a robot and then we can talk about its existance lol

So If you created a robot but had mostly human appendages, e.g. lungs heart etc. Just a cybernetic brain, would it count as a being?
The quote "I think therefore I am" would make any house hold computer a living being.

good point about the pc thing. but human parts on a robot wouldn't bring it in to being as a sentiant being would it. i'd say u need emotion, thats what makes us realy human if we didn't have emotion we'd be robots!!!! (metaphoricly) LOL

If, you think about it though, emotion can be easily mimicked. Emotion is just electrical triggers setting off certain parts of the brain. Whith advance in technology, these triggers will be mimick- able. Would an AI with these sorts triggers which would be very similar to a humans be called a being?

Replying to #29

This kinda is an English forum.

Adnan1992 · #28If, you think about it though, emotion can be easily mimicked. Emotion is just electrical triggers setting off certain parts of the brain. Whith advance in technology, these triggers will be mimick- able. Would an AI with these sorts triggers which would be very similar to a humans be called a being?

umm does anye know? Where's equitypetey go?

don't worry my pretty i'm right here, now hush, hush my little kitten. :-*emotion can be mimicked your right but u can tell if somthing is mimicking or actually feeling by the way the thing reacts . it could be very simple for somthing to look like its feeling but for it to actually feel is hard (spontainious emotions) laffin at a joke, feeling an emotion from music or a piece of art stuff like that. and the point is not if the ai was programmed but developed these signs of life on its own, now if it did this could we then start to belive its exsistance as a living thing. ???
i'm started to be reminded of the film short circuit (best film ever) which delves in to the subject.