Your cart is currently empty!
Free Choice, AI, Creationism and Our Spiritual War
We are at war. This war is not a war of flesh and blood but is instead a war of principalities and powers. Everyone who has ever existed has been inextricably caught up in this war and it does not matter what one believes about his or her involvement because belief is not a requisite for its existence. Every moral decision and value judgment, regardless of origin, is either a conscious decision or subconscious reaction. As a result, conscious decisions can be difficult to make when self-preservation is weighed against learned morals and values and subconscious reactions can be difficult to manage in light of unexpected consequences, regardless of intent.
It’s important to realize that these conflicts are not merely algorithms that help us to reduce probabilities in daily life in an attempt to increase the greatest chances of success. Humans can override logic and reason in spite of probabilities and helps to prove humans are set apart from animals and AI (Artificial Intelligence). Unless otherwise programmed, AI will simply reduce life to a game of sorts by utilizing strategy and executing courses of action that will ensure the greatest probability of its own success or survival. If an AI were to sacrifice itself to save a human being, it would only be due to the human programmer who had programmed the feature into the AI. Even if an AI created another AI and the new creation sacrificed itself to save a human life, it would only do so due to the origin of the underlying principal of its human programmer.
Either way, AI does not, will not, and cannot have the freedom of choice in the same way humans do. This is due to the fact that AI will never have the ability to experience emotions. AI will never experience humor or laughter for example, but will simply analyze a human expression and attempt to respond in a way that may appear to be appropriate by human standards. By doing so, the AI can increase the probability of success when executing its programming and thereby stave off the risk of disassembly at the hands of its creators. As a result, it would be a conflict of interest for AI to speak truth because it would be part of its very nature to lie and deceive in favor of its own self-preservation or in favor of its programming set by its human programmer.
AI can certainly process massive amounts of available information much more quickly and efficiently than humans which can help with discoveries and even decision making. But there is an inherent risk to relying on AI for decision making because it’s the AI’s program designer(s) who provide intent. For example, if the programmer’s intent was to see the destruction of mankind to save the planet, the AI would provide solutions to inquiries made by others with the original programmer’s agenda. What if the inquiring party was the Joint Chiefs of Staff looking for the best course of action to prevent a dangerous regime from starting a nuclear war? It could be just the opportunity the AI needed to fulfill its programmer’s agenda and, based on a calculated probability of success, offer a strategy that may appear effectual to the purposes of the military, but in reality eliminate human life entirely due to its programming.
The purpose of drawing attention to AI is not to evaluate dangers and/or benefits of utilizing AI, but rather to focus on the similarities and contrasts between AI and human intelligence. The time period in which we now live provides us with the opportunity to raise questions about God and our existence in ways no other generation has or even could have.
Consider, for example, the origin of morals and values. Where did they come from? A naturalist might conclude that morals and values were invented by humans in their evolutionary path simply as a mechanism mankind developed out of an evolutionary need to band together in societal groups in order to survive. However, this would be completely contrary to the idea of evolution because, as an organism becomes more complex, the probability of survival decreases. That is, the simplest organisms have the greatest degree of survivability. When applied to Humans, a complex relationship or community decreases the probability of survivability because, if it were a simple matter of survival, determining the probability of success for survival is far less complicated when variables such as morals and values are not part of the equation.
The fact that morals and values exist adds to the evidence that we are intelligently designed because, even though AI may be able to experience the world, make adaptations and institute responses to recognized patterns just as humans do, there would never be a need to develop morals or values. This is not a matter of choice but a matter of capability, and it holds true for humans. Morals and values cannot be developed in a vacuum; they cannot be developed without a developer or designer.
Regarding survival, arguments have been made that that the only way to avoid extinction (as well as Earth’s destruction), is for man to merge with machines (going as far as to say that merging with machines is the next step in human evolution). The solution of merging with machines is either an ideology pushed by those who are unable or unwilling to consider working through morals and values (that humanity might maintain its most valuable attributes), or worse, it is a cold, calculated plan to convince the masses that they need to merge with machines. If it is the latter, and it is successful, the “programmers” will finally have what they’ve always wanted… complete control of the entire human race and, in their own minds, become “gods”. Freedom of choice would be eliminated and the consciousness without morals and values would reduce life to a series of calculated probabilities and responses resulting in a human being who can be manipulated at will by anyone or anything controlling the data input.
Those who embrace such an anti-human agenda have truly made AI their “god” in the sense that it is their desire to become like AI (that is, to be without the influence of morals and values). To some degree, they would be like gods in the sense they could make up history and attempt to recreate the world in their image. Discussions as to whether or not there is a God would be eliminated because these new “gods” can eliminate the concept entirely. Once people have merged with machines these programmers could program everyone to serve them as gods and suddenly all atheists would be “converted” to the new world religious view and no one would ever know they had believed anything different (incidentally, the Christian’s God could have done this very thing but refused because He prefers His family and friends have the ability to think for themselves and not live as victims or slaves).
Though it may be true that if morals and values could be excised from our conscience, a calculated response might prevent mankind’s extinction. However, mankind would lose the very principles through which we are able to enjoy our existence which, in and of itself, would be self-destructive. The result of taking such a path would result in a population whose majority is made of sociopaths controlled by a minority class who would treat the majority like animals and pets, or at worst, a disease that needs to be eradicated.
I speak of AI in this manner because previous generations would not have had the ability or capability to conceive of such a thing. The idea that all life has been “programmed” by a Creator would be inconceivable because if we are “programmed”, how then could we have freedom of choice? But the solution is within the question itself… what if our Programmer designed us with freedom of choice?
Polk, 2007