Thoughts on Artificial Intelligence

Part 1 (Equations)

A fundamental key question that unlocks other worlds is as follows:

''The way in which all things in universe are formed as entities with individual identity, as well as, the way they relate to each other, is something that existed before their existence, or is a result of their existence''?

''Is it a prerequisite or consequence of their existence''?

Obviously, it was a prerequisite and as a true condition, preexisted.

The cheesecake recipe was "preexisted". The recipe, namely the way of relating various ingredients together (cheese, milk, sugar, etc), to form a cheesecake was always an existing reality - law.

Well, let's try a different approach.

1) Natural laws are described by mathematical equations that existed (as laws) before nature (of natural beings). That is, the law of gravity, thermodynamic, buoyancy, and so forth, were obviously a reality (truth) before the existence of matter.

Instead of the term ''laws'' it would not be inappropriate to use the term proportions or analogy. However, the term analogy is not complete. It applies to relatively stable structures. The analogy of the lego pieces that form the sheriff's office as the final LEGO synthesis (product), is stable.

For "alive entities", it would be better suited to use the term "laws" instead of analogy.

The laws that describe the relationships between the entities, in fact  they describe - define analogies. In fact, an equation is the description of a simple analogy. An algorithm is the description - definition of a complex analogy. The analogy could also be defined as a "way". The way in which all entities are formed, act, and relate.

2) The entities also, could be described by "dynamic" algorithms because the way they exist, the way in which they are getting formed and related, obeys an equation (or set of equations = protocol = algorithm = analogy  = ratio = logos = program), that change.

Concluding thoughts

1) Equations pre-exists, their place-reason of application.

2) The mathematical mind precedes the equations and their place of application. Just like the manufacturer of LEGO pieces, pre-exists the LEGO knights' castle.

3) Something similar applies with the entities (especially the living ones). Except that, the mathematical mind continues to support  them with equations (in a dynamic equation process). Otherwise, a mouse would always have the same form, age, always silent and stand still. Instead, it is subject to continuous reprogramming so that it can change.

4) Humans are programming products, with the ability of programming (unlike other entities). They have the ability to make algorithms, protocols, new entities and the ability of creating laws that define their inter relation with these new entities and the relation between the new entities.

5) And the question is: the product of human programming, the Artificial Intelligence (A.I.), will have the ability of programming?

Part 2 (The autonomy of A.I.)

Experts say yes. This is, in fact, the purpose of Creation based on the Darwinian view of things. Man, according to experts, is not the end of the evolution, but just a link. A link (which paradoxically and bypassing the laws of natural selection) will will control evolution by creating Artificial Intelligence. I say paradoxically, because according to the theory of natural selection, nature does not leave a strong ''link'' to self-act and even more, to commit suicide by choosing its disappearance, since A.I. will be the last creation of man. Namely, the "end" of mankind is the artificial intelligence, which autonomously and separately of its  creator, in an "explosion of intelligence" will be self reprogrammed infinitely and rapidly, leaving man out of history.

The actual ''end'' of this process cannot be foreseen by the ''experts''. They hope that the machines will:

a) together with any other development, they will develop human ethics (multiply them), or

b) will eventually develop a new value system upon which they will build a new world completely different from anthropocentric we know, since there will be no man by that time. It will have disappeared  as any other ancient evolutionary link.

Conclusion:

1) Whether the machines will have a value system that will not know what to do with, since it will refer to humans,  who no longer exist,

2) or they will have evolved into something completely indefinable and indistinguishable from the human species, which will no longer relate to mankind.

3) or they will have evolved into "perfect" humans, in fact  to God-men, as Jesus Himself (since He undoubtedly represents perfect "morality").

However, the best perspective (the latter one) does not withstand criticism, reckoned with the fact that Christ gave so much importance to the intelligence that ... he chose as pillars of his teaching, illiterate fishermen. It is like saying that in order to be value receptive, someone has to be an illiterate and a simple entity, because values ​​do not ''live'' at intelligence level.

Part 3 (Fishermen and Intelligence)

Remark:

Some would claim that the fishermen were illiterate, but they were intelligent. Here we open up the huge topic of the understanding and proper use of the term intelligence. Because we can develop a lot of theories into a non-existent concept. I'm sure that if we ask 100 people ''what is intelligence?'', we'll get 100 different answers. Some of them would be, ''data'', ''databases'', ''data processing'', ''computational power'', all together in the service of an entity that owns that intelligence and uses it. Namely, as for the fishermen case, we would have the following options:

1) They were illiterate and not intelligent, that means that intelligence is totally useless in relation to morality,

2) They were illiterate and intelligent, that means that knowledge is totally useless in relation to morality (and intelligence obviously).

So, the ethics of Christ, as the most desirable proposition (target) of evolution of machine ethics, is not at all related to computing power = intelligence (option 1), nor to the amount of stored knowledge (option 2).

Following the above, for the time being, we have no reason to believe that the machines will succeed in the area of ​​the "human value system", which is the last hope of the "experts" and the best prospect of their Darwin teleology, the creation of the superhuman.

Of course, Darwinism and teleology are two extremely incompatible concepts, because the first presupposes the non-existence of the latter, but in all these thoughts of the "expert" futurists this will not be the only logical jump.

Part 4 (The Wishes)

"Experts" wish that artificial intelligence will multiply the ethics developed by man. Here we have two serious doubts.

1) The ascertainment that man actually developed morality, is not true. In a century when every historical observer recognizes as the bloodiest of human history, in a present where warfare places outnumber the tens or hundreds all over the world and hunger  wipes out countries, how can we talk about moral development!

Someone may say that manhood developed collective ethics.

SCHOPENHAUER claims that "thousands of people who are here in front of our eyes, mutually bound to respect peace, are tigers and wolves in the depths that a particularly effective muzzle (state-institutions) prevents them from biting." He argues that individual ethics has remained at the level of the morality of the pro-human, and only collective ethics "developed", but only as a guarantee and shielding of individual immorality. So collective ethics, is essentially immoral. And if this is easily understood by silly people, let alone be infinitely understandable by Artificial Intelligence (A.I.), which will "copy and multiply" (in the desirable case) human ethics.

2) Human ethics is not a human achievement. Human ethics is humanity's operating system. They are the values ​​of humanity. Only man is organized around abstract concepts like God, capitalism, communism (ideologies in general), law, money and values ​​in general.

It is not us or each of us. It is the operating system that takes us forward.

So how will A.I. go on?

If it multiplies individual human ethics, it will end up with Armageddon. If it multiplies the collective (state) ethics, it will end up exactly the same. On the basis of what criterion will be developed when there will be no pain, desire, death, pleasure to lay the foundation for human ethics? Οr even better, οn the basis of what criterion will be developed when A.I. is set on another operating system, different from human ethics?

(Remark: Some here will react by thinking that human ethics is not of animal origin, it is not a product of evolution and chemical reactions. I would like them to have in mind that this text is written on a single condition. That God doesn't exist! And another one, that Darwin's theory proved to be true).

Part 5 (the value of TN)

After all above, a question arises.

- Why did not man develop intelligence? - Because it does not adds any evolutionary advantage!

An evolutionary advantage according to Darwinism would be to achieve immortality (through natural selection). But man does not seem to evolve to become immortal. So the "experts", remaining faithful to the doctrine of immortality, must change the subject of immortality. It is not the man (they claim). With the man the evolution has not said its last word. Man is simply an evolutionary link.  Immortality belongs to A.I.

Part 6 (Survival-bliss-immortality)

This triptych is the base of the creative essence, the driving force and the subconscious or conscious torque of life of every human being.

It's not the same for other living or non-living beings. The animals reach up to the 1st (survival).

The intelligence has a very little relation to this triptych. Unless someone develops it to serve this triptych.

Thus, intelligence, as well as its continued development, as an end in itself, is of no interest or anyway is of such interest as an explosion of vegetation in the Amazon for Ethiopian inhabitants, or the Google machine for a blind and deaf.

The only exceptionally unlikely interesting development of A.I. would be to .... become a human. Namely, to end up to an entity WANTING to survive, to thrive and to be immortal.

Somewhere here we have to do a parenthesis. Man does not want to be immortal on conditions of repetitive generations. His one  life is enough. No one wants the repetition, or the eternal prolongation of his present life. It would be the least boring. One finds it when he grows up. When the surprise and the expectation of surprise decrease dramatically. Even a young man can realize this truth, if he is intelligent enough (who wants to live forever! Queen).

Immortality is a driving desire, as a summation of survival and bliss. And there is no room here for boredom. It is the area of ​​continuous stimulation, constant surprises, continuous visceral flow. Something like youthful love.

All human life is an attempt to relive something that empirically knows it exists. Not the youthful love itself, but by the state of bliss and ecstasy that he now knows that exists. Every effort later on with sex, eating, power, wealth, knowledge, intelligence, immortality, psychotropic substances, religions and ideologies is an attempt to taste those nuggets of this memory.

Many times he attempts to cumulate all of the above to become for a while, young, ignorant, infinite, avaricious, fearless, vulnerable, weak, invincible, virgin, poor, stupid, brilliant, IMMORTAL.

Part 7 (conclusion)

It's hard to conclude on what A.I. is about, because we cannot confidently answer the question of what intelligence is. let alone, Artificial Intelligence. Technocrats, they like to use abstract concepts in their achievements.

It is easier to say what is not A.I.

It is not an evolutionary stage of the humanity.

It is not an evolutionary stage of any kind of species.

It is not an evolutionary stage of nature.

It is not related to Darwinism.

It is not related to teleology (purpose, destination, etc.).

If it were to be categorized, it would be described as a "laboratory virus that has the potential to escape".

So, keep calm and do not be blurred by the lamps (of technology) like night butterflies.

NAL