#are validated by spiritual experiences. So... will this self-report count? Hmm. More food for thoughts...
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Text
Hmm. Not a Christian, so my arguments against this aren't about sacrileges. But I also wanna muse aloud about this...
What I find problematic about this is that it substitutes a social interaction that is traditionally seen as relieving and helpful with a machine that is incapable of understanding what is being said to it. Whatever advice it can give out is based on algorithms and statistical probabilities. It listens to your sounds—but not your words—in order to find the correct response. The answers given are not meaningful because they are generated without Machine Jesus consciously understanding what you said.
What this looks to me is the degradation of the purpose of communication, be it to a human or their deity.
The idea that one can somehow replace a meaningful exchange between thinking, sapient beings with an unthinking, stats-dependent machine that was merely taught to speak in a superficially human way (or whoever they happen to roleplay) can only arise from a steady loss of quality communication throughout the years. People have to be acclimated to a lack of meaningful, human interactions for years to actually think "Meh, as long as there's an answer, it's a conversation and a job well done, right?"
Isn't this the same genius thought process behind robocalls and annoying ass robot customer service? I always spam 0 for operator because I'm so sick of it.
There are people who do think that such a replacement is comforting and consoling. I wonder if it further reveals how badly most of our day-to-day interactions and conversations (with anyone at all) have become, such that conversing with an unthinking machine is seen as equally good and fulfilling.
We already have too few meaningful, human conversations between people nowadays. Ain't surprising more people seem to feel lonelier and more isolated every day. This proposition right here helps nobody, methinks.
I think we should actually reclaim more avenues for conversations that are more human while turning other avenues into a bulwark of human social interactions. I think this is one place that should have been a bulwark.
Just as an aside: this also seems like an act of humans giving up on trying to understand either other people of their own congregation or the teachings themselves, such that they rather outsource it to a machine. Are we really so lacking in confidence in our own ability to think, connect, and understand?
News articles additional sources for this story: 1. The Strait Times (Singaporean) 2. VICE (American)
Hey, @flagellant, I think I need that rundown on the difference between blasphemy, sacrilege, and heresy again.
#just an atheist's two cents#actually this discussion of using AI to impersonate real people—especially religious figure—was something I thought about last year.#The question that prompted this *was* about making AI Jesus.#To make the topic easier for me to muse... at the time I just imagined it as someone I'm far more familiar with. An AI Buddha!#Oh! The news articles are an interesting read. There are actually people who felt their faith affirmed after#using the service. “I felt taken care of and very consoled.”#In the VICE article、it is claimed that 2/3 had a spiritual experience using the service. (wish we have the original data linked).#Hmm... So people do perceive benefits from this.#Is “a spiritual experience” all one needs to validate its use? To an atheist. It does seem like spiritual matters#are validated by spiritual experiences. So... will this self-report count? Hmm. More food for thoughts...#human human human
9K notes
·
View notes