What is life?

[duordi]

One first has to decide what the criteria will be for superiority. Is it perhaps not just coincidence that humans who wish to believe they are superior will immediately look to the one area where humans excel over all other animals? Isn't it likely that any species is going to look to it's particular area of excellence when making such a comparison?

Animals can think, do think and demonstrate their ability to think so clearly that only those who wish to remain blind to the fact can possibly ignore it. But in doing so, they render themselves less than superior in intellect because they use their thought process to limit their ability to recognize intelligence. As Twain said; "It is just like a man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perception."

Twain was a fiction writer and he had a lot of problems.

Scientific information has no room for touchy feel-good emotional daydreams.

The touchy feel-good emotional daydreams are at best untrue and at worst attempts to deceive or be deceived.

"Where the truth is not valued, lies prevail."

Duane

 

[Chalnoth]

If dolphins were intelligent then humans and dolphins would be at war.

Why? Not all of the more intelligent animals are warlike. Humans are, as are chimpanzees. But our close relative, the bonobo (also known as a pygmy chimpanzee), is very peaceful.

 

[Chalnoth]

Twain was a fiction writer and he had a lot of problems.

He was a good fiction writer. As such he had a good way with words. What is the problem with using the words of a man who was good at them? It's not as if Beastt was attempting to use Twain as an authority on anything: he was simply quoting Twain's words to make a point. It is irrelevant how right or wrong Twain was. The purpose of the quotation is to present an opinion with colorful language.

 

[jamesrwright3]

Life is...like a box of chocolates

 

[Beastt]

Twain was a fiction writer and he had a lot of problems.

He wrote both fiction and non-fiction. And even those who specialize only in fiction can still leave behind quotations notable for their validity. Many of Twain's quotations fall within such a realm.

Scientific information has no room for touchy feel-good emotional daydreams.

Which is why I keep giving you sound, documented and scientifically produced information and keep suggesting that you go read the information for yourself. But apparently you're not prone to reading anything which contradicts your preconceptions.

The touchy feel-good emotional daydreams are at best untrue and at worst attempts to deceive or be deceived.

I agree. That's why I recognize religions as "feel-good emotional daydreams".

"Where the truth is not valued, lies prevail."

Unfortunately, when it comes to religion and misconceptions spread by religion, truth is not valued. And that which can be shown to be a lie is weaved by those who refuse to recognize the truth, as metaphorical.

"A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." '- Mark Twain​

 

[Beastt]

If dolphins were intelligent then humans and dolphins would be at war.

Apparently you've never witnessed a pod of dolphins washed ashore in Japan or the atrocities committed against dolphins by fishermen who believe the dolphins are competing with them for fish.

Dolphins are not a morally superior peace loving being.
They hunt and eat other fish mercilessly and so do we.

Then again, the dophin has a digestive physiology consistent with the consumption of fish. Humans do not. And dolphins have, on many occassions, offered humans protection against other marine predators such as sharks and guided boats through treacherous channels.

For the purpose of this discussion I will define sin as a violation by a sentient being of its own moral beliefs.

Then not knowing the moral beliefs of the non-human animals, you can say nothing about their morality.

 

[RavenPoe]

All this comparison between dolphins and humans.

They are closer than we think. They have "relations" for pleasure not just reproduction. I've also heard of dolphins turning on another dophin because it was from another pod or a slightly different species.

Sounds a lot like humans to me. All I know is, I'll make sure my tuna is dolphin-safe just in case.

 

[duordi]

Apparently there are several of you which believe dolphins are sentient if not as smart or even smarter then humans.

If that is the case do you think it is morally wrong to kill them?

Is it morally wrong to a greater degree to kill them as opposed to other animals
which you would not consider sentient?

Please define what life form you would consider non-sentient.

Duane.

 

[Beastt]

Apparently there are several of you which believe dolphins are sentient if not as smart or even smarter then humans.

If that is the case do you think it is morally wrong to kill them?

Yes

Is it morally wrong to a greater degree to kill them as opposed to other animals
which you would not consider sentient?

I'm not sure what animals I would consider to lack sentience.

Please define what life form you would consider non-sentient.

Probably single-celled animals and possibly some kinds of insects. But it's rather difficult to know what an animal which can't be trained in skills requiring higher brain function does or doesn't perceive about its own existence.

 

[BVZ]

Reread the post here.

The technology does not exist to do this yet. (It might never exist, that is not the point.)

I am merely addressing the OP.

The OP asks what is intelligence, and is it morraly wrong to switch off an AI with the same mental capacity as a human.

I then show in the post I linked above that it is theoretically possible to create an AI with human capacity, and that it will be morally wrong to switch off that AI, since it is basically still the original biological person.

 

[duordi]

Reread the post here.

The technology does not exist to do this yet. (It might never exist, that is not the point.)

I am merely addressing the OP.

The OP asks what is intelligence, and is it morraly wrong to switch off an AI with the same mental capacity as a human.

I then show in the post I linked above that it is theoretically possible to create an AI with human capacity, and that it will be morally wrong to switch off that AI, since it is basically still the original biological person.

So, did you assume that mankind does not have a soul?
Or
Did you assume the soul has no affect on the actions of the individual.
Or
Did you assume a soul is a property of a thinking being and that the computer would have a soul equivalent to a human.

Duane

 

[duordi]

I may not agree with your opinions but they are logical and consistent.

I would say that the only real disagreement we have pertains to our definition of "sentient".

Duane