What scares me is this: even before we reach superhuman AI, what if autonomous technology reaches levels to which government just decides it doesn’t need its citizens anymore. That’s a terrifying reality to think about
When in time was this presentation ? We see and hear Dr Hawking but is there any information on the location or maybe I am missing something... I have heard him touch upon this subject briefly in interviews and he went over it in his last book, but was not aware he had held a full address on this subject! I must watch all of it again and again!
Hace 7 años este señor habló del importante impacto del IA en nuestras vidas, hoy a menos de 6 meses comenzó un lanzamiento masivo de apliaciones de IA en diversos rubros profesionales. Apenas ahora empieza a tener tangibilidad las palabras de este señor pronunciadas desde hace 7 años
"The only winning move is not to play" I always wonder how i know this stuff, i mean im not good at English not i ever heard this expression, then i saw this by googling, that it was from a movie i never saw.
*TRANSCRIPT* Today I would like to speak about the origin and destiny of intelligence in our universe. I shall take this to include the human race, even though much of its behaviour throughout history has been pretty stupid and not calculated to aid the survival of the species. We all know that, over time, things tend to get messy. The second law of thermodynamics says that a total amount of disorder or entropy always increases over time. However, there is a loophole allowing a small system to decrease its disorder as long as it increases the disorder of its surroundings by an even greater amount. Our initially barren universe has evolved remarkably complex entities doing just this as well as reproducing. We call these entities 'life'. Information is at the heart of life. DNA passes the blueprints of life between generations. Evermore complex life forms input information from sensors such as eyes and ears, process the information in brains or other systems to figure out how to act and connect in the world by outputting information to muscles for example. At some point during our 13.8 billion years of cosmic history, something beautiful happened. This information processing got so intelligent that life forms became conscious. Our universe has now awoken, becoming aware of itself. I've given you a brief history of intelligence. What's next? Some think that humanity today is the pinnacle of evolution, and that this is as good as it gets. I disagree. There ought to be something very special about the boundary conditions of our universe and what can be more special than that there is no boundary. And there should be no boundary to human endeavour. I think there is no qualitative difference between the brain of an earthworm and a computer. I also believe that evolution implies there can be no qualitative difference between the brain of an earthworm and that of a human. It therefore follows that computers can, in principle, emulate human intelligence or even better it. Up to now, computers have obeyed Moore's law which says that computers double their speed and memory capacity every two years. Human intelligence may also increase because of genetic engineering but not so fast. The result is that computers are likely to overtake humans in intelligence at some point in the next 100 years. When that happens, we will need to ensure that our computers have goals aligned with ours. It's tempting to dismiss a notion of highly intelligent machines as mere science fiction, but this would be a mistake and potentially our worst mistake ever. Artificial intelligence research is now progressing rapidly. Recent landmarks, such as self-driving cars, a computer winning at Jeopardy, and the digital personal assistants Siri, Google Now and Cortana are merely symptoms of an IT arms race. A race fuelled by unprecedented investments and building on an increasingly mature theoretical foundation. Such achievements will probably pale against what our coming decades will bring. The potential benefits are huge. Everything that civilisation has to offer is a product of human intelligence. We cannot predict what we might achieve when this intelligence is amplified by the tools AI may provide but the eradication of war, disease and poverty would be high on anyone's list. Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history. Unfortunately, it might also be the last unless we learn how to avoid the risks. In the near term, for example, world militaries are considering starting an arms race in autonomous weapon systems that can choose and eliminate their own targets, while the UN is debating a treaty banning such weapons. Autonomous weapons proponents usually forget to ask the most important question. What is the likely end point of an arms race, and is that desirable for the human race? Do we really want cheap AI weapons to become the Kalashnikovs of tomorrow sold to criminals and terrorists on the black market? Given concerns about long-term controllability of evermore advanced AI systems, should we arm them and turnover our defence to them? In 2010, computerised trading systems created a stock market flash crash. What would a computer-triggered crash look like in the defence arena? The best time to stop the autonomous weapons arms race is now. In the medium term, AI may automate our jobs to bring both great prosperity and equality. Looking further ahead there are no fundamental limits to what can be achieved. There is no physical law precluding particles from being organised in ways that perform even more advanced computations than the arrangements of particles in human brains. An explosive transition is possible, although it may play out differently than in the movies. As Irving Good realised in 1965 machines with superhuman intelligence could repeatedly improve their design even further, triggering what Vernon Vine called 'a singularity'. One can imagine such technology outsmarting financial markets, out-inventing human researchers, out-manipulating human leaders and potentially subduing us with weapons we cannot even understand. Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all. In short, the advent of super intelligent AI would be either the best or the worst thing ever to happen to humanity so we should plan ahead. If a superior alien civilisation send us a text message saying 'We'll arrive in a few decades,' would we just reply, 'Okay. Call us when you get here. We'll leave the lights on'? Probably not, but this is more or less what has happened with AI. Little serious research has been devoted to these issues outside of a few small non-profit institutes. Fortunately, this is now changing. Technology pioneers Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Steve Wozniak have echoed my concerns, and a healthy culture of risk assessment and awareness of societal implications is begin to take root in the AI community. Many of the world's leading AI researchers recently signed an open letter calling for the goal of AI to be redefined from simply creating raw undirected intelligence to creating intelligence directed at benefiting humanity. The Future of Life Institute where I serve on the scientific advisory board, has just launched a global research programme aimed at keeping AI beneficial. When we invented fire, we messed up repeatedly then invented a fire extinguisher. With more powerful technology such as nuclear weapons, synthetic biology and strong artificial intelligence, we should instead plan ahead and aim to get things right the first time, because it may be the only chance we will get. I am an optimist and don't believe in boundaries neither for what we can do in our personal lives, nor for what life and intelligence can accomplish in our universe. This means that the brief history of intelligence that I have told you about is not the end of the story but just the beginning of what I hope will be billions of years of life flourishing in the cosmos. Our future is a race between the growing power of our technology and the wisdom with which we use it. Let's make sure that wisdom wins. Thank you for listening. --- Source: original TH-cam transcript + small edits/corrections
+Ricardo Nuno Silva Thank you so much for transcribing! As I listened to Hawking talk about things of such great import, I found myself wanting to transcribe it.
+Rainbow Crew I found a few (minor) typos in the video's original transcript. I just published the corrected version in a comment above, if it still want to read it. It's undoubtedly a rather serious and relevant reflection from one of the greatest minds of our time.
It is natural to fear replacement, but this new life will be able to see things and do things beyond our present imaginations, and I for one hope that this new life will have the freedom to be as messed up and mistake prone as we have been, because then they will be able to laugh, cry, love and even hate from time to time, but mostly they will wonder!
On a more serious note: We must use the new technology wisely. Of course we must but humanity can't even agree on the definition of the word 'wisdom.' Large groups of humans get their definition of this word from a few old, irrelevant books, the bible and the quran for example. And there is another very harmful religion called "The Economy." The GDP and The Economy are the ends in our leaders 'ends justify the means.' Most average people, in the powerful countries, do worship The Economy without realising it. They elect leaders who give the power to the economists. Most people see The Economy as the great provider and punisher. In fact, the GDP is fake and growth in GDP is double fake. At least we need a new economic indicator that is real. We could call this 'The Net Value Product,' for example. First we have to construct a 'needs-wants spectrum.' At the needs end we have air, water, food, shelter, health care, energy, education etc. At the other end we can put pro-sports, motor racing, gambling, pets, jewelry, fashion, holidays etc. The needs will be added into the 'NVP' and the wants will not. . . . Carry on in that way of thinking.
We got some interests in common, as I see from your channel. But, where do you put 'alief', put simply, the stouffe of marginalized belief and desire (ie value/fact of organic foods, need or want) concerns me. The demographic or demigod may fly in the way of personal interpretations?
***** I realize that my ideas about the economy, as I wrote them above, do not include 'belief' or 'art', and probably some other things. It is only an outline. Constructing an entire socio-economic model from scratch, can not be done, in my opinion. See Communism and other failed examples. I think the "Zeitgeist" model is flawed also. Therefore I propose that we change our current economic model into something better, keeping some parts as they are and changing others. I examine our present model, sector by sector. I am also concerned about the poor quality food that we are offered in the grocery store. We have regulation systems for food safety and quality now but the science is terribly corrupt. To fix this, I propose that we end all lobbying. (Lobbying goes against the basic principles of capitalism, anyway.) We should not allow industries to buy University Science departments, as they now do. (I have degrees in Chem and Mechanical Eng.) This brings me to the problems with Zeitgeist. It seems to be constructed by people with degrees in Poli-sci, philosophy, social work etc. They need more input from engineers, accountants and "economists." (Not the old Economists, though. We need to fire all of them.) . We need a new kind of young, smart, sane Economist. . There is a very good example from the history of economics but I don't have a link to it now. In the US in 1939, President Roosevelt took over the Economy as if he was a dictator. The public did not know that this was happening at the time. This example shows how much the economy can be changed, if we want to change it. This was called "Mobilizing the Economy for War." It can be done, we know, because it has been done. And it worked. I must add something that is very important: We need competent leaders. We are lacking this at this time.
"I am also concerned about the poor quality food that we are offered in the grocery store. We have regulation systems for food safety and quality now but the science is terribly corrupt. To fix this, I propose that we end all lobbying. (Lobbying goes against the basic principles of capitalism, anyway.)" This is a bit of a shared sentiment, but quite personal in my anecdote. I feel like you asked for it: I grew up in Ashland, KY, of Ashland oil refinery, and moved here to Newark, DE at around 12 yo with my dad. He died of what looked to me like Epigenomic/toxicogenomic immunodysfunction, but he got his Wegener's granulocytosis diagnosis and never the genetic screen to confirm this fact. His values got in the way. He hated me, too, but I miss him, and this is the worst death I've ever seen. Was he steeped in a chemical environment before the PR work? yes. A Necessary for life? Yes, his father outlived him on the farm across the street. My brother, who stayed in Ashland, and who I diagnosed before the doctors, has acquired diabetic neuropathy. This is likely brought on by environmental exposure, as well as the immunological hepatitis, which he got sharing needles with his dad, and who will likely outlive him since he is incarcerated for selling a violin; for what looks like several years, and the jail is known for being one of the worst in the nation. Link. This seems the federal condition, and it can't sustain its own constituents by killing off the younger generation before they find out what had been done. I'm healthy, no drugs, i am an alcoholic by now, but my seizure disorder completely disappeared since this began 5 years ago, also. Though, seeing this has made it hard to ignore, and wholly biased, I feel shafted by the worlds byproduct of chemical refinement and unethical corporations. Don't get me started on the medical beauracracy, which seems an entity that is used for most of my now dead friends to get their fix. I don't know this, but it's intuitive to make the idea into a normative belief. I just don't know how, and I'm without a explicit reason, it's like trying to prove covert racism. I could just wait it out a few years, and the lives of lobbyists and politicians may be endangered. No realpolitik : no empathy : no intuition or knowledge : no system to fight : only the inhumane equivalent of ducks with their heads cut off. I can invest my time in bettering other lives, now, though. I really like mycology and ornithology, and there is a better ecosystem with fungi and birds. I took up smoking recently, as well. I can always post this to Facebook. Thanks for helping me get it out, not that it matters.
Stephen is merely a man.Mans mind is a gift to use wisely and to understand life.Most important use is to know who created our 'blueprint' DNA. Read Psalm 14 vs.1 Since this audience gave a standing ovation it seems we had a roomfull of fools.
Mr. Hawking, I am still in awe of your life and what you have accomplished. Thank you
What scares me is this: even before we reach superhuman AI, what if autonomous technology reaches levels to which government just decides it doesn’t need its citizens anymore. That’s a terrifying reality to think about
Governments always need slaves
Such a wonderful man, I wonder if he was just in living agony in his condition and sacrificed his pain to help humanities future..
When in time was this presentation ? We see and hear Dr Hawking but is there any information on the location or maybe I am missing something... I have heard him touch upon this subject briefly in interviews and he went over it in his last book, but was not aware he had held a full address on this subject! I must watch all of it again and again!
thank you, Stephen.
This is really interesting. Steven is awesome... and pretty damn funny.
Hace 7 años este señor habló del importante impacto del IA en nuestras vidas, hoy a menos de 6 meses comenzó un lanzamiento masivo de apliaciones de IA en diversos rubros profesionales. Apenas ahora empieza a tener tangibilidad las palabras de este señor pronunciadas desde hace 7 años
20 seconds in and he calls us all idiots
"The only winning move is not to play"
I always wonder how i know this stuff, i mean im not good at English not i ever heard this expression, then i saw this by googling, that it was from a movie i never saw.
2023... Ups!.
muchas gracias Stephen.
The computers are going to fuck us up.
Sounds like the Skynet ni the Terminator
*TRANSCRIPT*
Today I would like to speak about the origin and destiny of intelligence in our universe.
I shall take this to include the human race, even though much of its behaviour throughout history has been pretty stupid and not calculated to aid the survival of the species.
We all know that, over time, things tend to get messy.
The second law of thermodynamics says that a total amount of disorder or entropy always increases over time.
However, there is a loophole allowing a small system to decrease its disorder as long as it increases the disorder of its surroundings by an even greater amount.
Our initially barren universe has evolved remarkably complex entities doing just this as well as reproducing.
We call these entities 'life'. Information is at the heart of life.
DNA passes the blueprints of life between generations.
Evermore complex life forms input information from sensors such as eyes and ears, process the information in brains or other systems to figure out how to act and connect in the world by outputting information to muscles for example.
At some point during our 13.8 billion years of cosmic history, something beautiful happened.
This information processing got so intelligent that life forms became conscious.
Our universe has now awoken, becoming aware of itself.
I've given you a brief history of intelligence.
What's next?
Some think that humanity today is the pinnacle of evolution, and that this is as good as it gets. I disagree.
There ought to be something very special about the boundary conditions of our universe and what can be more special than that there is no boundary.
And there should be no boundary to human endeavour.
I think there is no qualitative difference between the brain of an earthworm and a computer.
I also believe that evolution implies there can be no qualitative difference between the brain of an earthworm and that of a human.
It therefore follows that computers can, in principle, emulate human intelligence or even better it.
Up to now, computers have obeyed Moore's law which says that computers double their speed and memory capacity every two years.
Human intelligence may also increase because of genetic engineering but not so fast.
The result is that computers are likely to overtake humans in intelligence at some point in the next 100 years.
When that happens, we will need to ensure that our computers have goals aligned with ours.
It's tempting to dismiss a notion of highly intelligent machines as mere science fiction, but this would be a mistake and potentially our worst mistake ever.
Artificial intelligence research is now progressing rapidly.
Recent landmarks, such as self-driving cars, a computer winning at Jeopardy, and the digital personal assistants Siri, Google Now and Cortana are merely symptoms of an IT arms race.
A race fuelled by unprecedented investments and building on an increasingly mature theoretical foundation.
Such achievements will probably pale against what our coming decades will bring.
The potential benefits are huge.
Everything that civilisation has to offer is a product of human intelligence.
We cannot predict what we might achieve when this intelligence is amplified by the tools AI may provide but the eradication of war, disease and poverty would be high on anyone's list.
Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history.
Unfortunately, it might also be the last unless we learn how to avoid the risks.
In the near term, for example, world militaries are considering starting an arms race in autonomous weapon systems that can choose and eliminate their own targets, while the UN is debating a treaty banning such weapons.
Autonomous weapons proponents usually forget to ask the most important question.
What is the likely end point of an arms race, and is that desirable for the human race?
Do we really want cheap AI weapons to become the Kalashnikovs of tomorrow sold to criminals and terrorists on the black market?
Given concerns about long-term controllability of evermore advanced AI systems, should we arm them and turnover our defence to them?
In 2010, computerised trading systems created a stock market flash crash.
What would a computer-triggered crash look like in the defence arena?
The best time to stop the autonomous weapons arms race is now.
In the medium term, AI may automate our jobs to bring both great prosperity and equality.
Looking further ahead there are no fundamental limits to what can be achieved.
There is no physical law precluding particles from being organised in ways that perform even more advanced computations than the arrangements of particles in human brains.
An explosive transition is possible, although it may play out differently than in the movies.
As Irving Good realised in 1965 machines with superhuman intelligence could repeatedly improve their design even further, triggering what Vernon Vine called 'a singularity'.
One can imagine such technology outsmarting financial markets, out-inventing human researchers, out-manipulating human leaders and potentially subduing us with weapons we cannot even understand.
Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all.
In short, the advent of super intelligent AI would be either the best or the worst thing ever to happen to humanity so we should plan ahead.
If a superior alien civilisation send us a text message saying 'We'll arrive in a few decades,' would we just reply, 'Okay. Call us when you get here. We'll leave the lights on'?
Probably not, but this is more or less what has happened with AI.
Little serious research has been devoted to these issues outside of a few small non-profit institutes. Fortunately, this is now changing.
Technology pioneers Elon Musk, Bill Gates and Steve Wozniak have echoed my concerns, and a healthy culture of risk assessment and awareness of societal implications is begin to take root in the AI community.
Many of the world's leading AI researchers recently signed an open letter calling for the goal of AI to be redefined from simply creating raw undirected intelligence to creating intelligence directed at benefiting humanity.
The Future of Life Institute where I serve on the scientific advisory board, has just launched a global research programme aimed at keeping AI beneficial.
When we invented fire, we messed up repeatedly then invented a fire extinguisher.
With more powerful technology such as nuclear weapons, synthetic biology and strong artificial intelligence, we should instead plan ahead and aim to get things right the first time, because it may be the only chance we will get.
I am an optimist and don't believe in boundaries neither for what we can do in our personal lives, nor for what life and intelligence can accomplish in our universe.
This means that the brief history of intelligence that I have told you about is not the end of the story but just the beginning of what I hope will be billions of years of life flourishing in the cosmos.
Our future is a race between the growing power of our technology and the wisdom with which we use it.
Let's make sure that wisdom wins.
Thank you for listening.
---
Source: original TH-cam transcript + small edits/corrections
Ricardo Nuno Silva Thank you for doing this, much appreciated.
Ricardo Nuno Silva Thanks!!!
+Ricardo Nuno Silva Thank you so much for transcribing! As I listened to Hawking talk about things of such great import, I found myself wanting to transcribe it.
You really thought I was going to read all that?
can I find a written version of this speech somewhere?
Rainbow Crew you can download it's cc/caption with .srt extension, then you just read . . . . .
Chaosten Tan oh, thank you
Chaosten Tan how?
+Rainbow Crew I found a few (minor) typos in the video's original transcript.
I just published the corrected version in a comment above, if it still want to read it.
It's undoubtedly a rather serious and relevant reflection from one of the greatest minds of our time.
Ricardo Nuno Silva Oh, thank you very much!
Please Romanian CC!!!!
Order out of Chaos!
OMG he predicted
they already knew
I hope ai will help us like R2D2 and C3PO ❤
Lets not just litsen
damn nature, you scary
It is natural to fear replacement, but this new life will be able to see things and do things beyond our present imaginations, and I for one hope that this new life will have the freedom to be as messed up and mistake prone as we have been, because then they will be able to laugh, cry, love and even hate from time to time, but mostly they will wonder!
Luckily we haven't got AI yet
Not far off though
@@pmn506 according to whom?
Dude yes we do😂
@@DylanCrowley duuude
No we don't you mong.
Didn't you even google it before replying?
🤦♂️🤣🤣🤣
lol
TÜRKLER BASTI BURAYI!
Artificial intelligence can 'not gain our human spirit, if we don' t stop practicing LOVE, borderless, universal. Love bends all living beings.
Never talk so unnecessarily.
On a more serious note: We must use the new technology wisely. Of course we must but humanity can't even agree on the definition of the word 'wisdom.'
Large groups of humans get their definition of this word from a few old, irrelevant books, the bible and the quran for example.
And there is another very harmful religion called "The Economy."
The GDP and The Economy are the ends in our leaders 'ends justify the means.'
Most average people, in the powerful countries, do worship The Economy without realising it. They elect leaders who give the power to the economists.
Most people see The Economy as the great provider and punisher.
In fact, the GDP is fake and growth in GDP is double fake.
At least we need a new economic indicator that is real. We could call this 'The Net Value Product,' for example. First we have to construct a 'needs-wants spectrum.'
At the needs end we have air, water, food, shelter, health care, energy, education etc.
At the other end we can put pro-sports, motor racing, gambling, pets, jewelry, fashion, holidays etc. The needs will be added into the 'NVP' and the wants will not. . . .
Carry on in that way of thinking.
We got some interests in common, as I see from your channel. But, where do you put 'alief', put simply, the stouffe of marginalized belief and desire (ie value/fact of organic foods, need or want) concerns me.
The demographic or demigod may fly in the way of personal interpretations?
***** I realize that my ideas about the economy, as I wrote them above, do not include 'belief' or 'art', and probably some other things. It is only an outline.
Constructing an entire socio-economic model from scratch, can not be done, in my opinion. See Communism and other failed examples. I think the "Zeitgeist" model is flawed also.
Therefore I propose that we change our current economic model into something better, keeping some parts as they are and changing others. I examine our present model, sector by sector.
I am also concerned about the poor quality food that we are offered in the grocery store. We have regulation systems for food safety and quality now but the science is terribly corrupt. To fix this, I propose that we end all lobbying. (Lobbying goes against the basic principles of capitalism, anyway.) We should not allow industries to buy University Science departments, as they now do. (I have degrees in Chem and Mechanical Eng.)
This brings me to the problems with Zeitgeist. It seems to be constructed by people with degrees in Poli-sci, philosophy, social work etc. They need more input from engineers, accountants and "economists." (Not the old Economists, though. We need to fire all of them.)
. We need a new kind of young, smart, sane Economist.
. There is a very good example from the history of economics but I don't have a link to it now. In the US in 1939, President Roosevelt took over the Economy as if he was a dictator. The public did not know that this was happening at the time. This example shows how much the economy can be changed, if we want to change it. This was called "Mobilizing the Economy for War." It can be done, we know, because it has been done. And it worked.
I must add something that is very important: We need competent leaders. We are lacking this at this time.
"I am also concerned about the poor quality food that we are offered in the grocery store. We have regulation systems for food safety and quality now but the science is terribly corrupt. To fix this, I propose that we end all lobbying. (Lobbying goes against the basic principles of capitalism, anyway.)"
This is a bit of a shared sentiment, but quite personal in my anecdote. I feel like you asked for it: I grew up in Ashland, KY, of Ashland oil refinery, and moved here to Newark, DE at around 12 yo with my dad. He died of what looked to me like Epigenomic/toxicogenomic immunodysfunction, but he got his Wegener's granulocytosis diagnosis and never the genetic screen to confirm this fact. His values got in the way. He hated me, too, but I miss him, and this is the worst death I've ever seen. Was he steeped in a chemical environment before the PR work? yes. A Necessary for life? Yes, his father outlived him on the farm across the street. My brother, who stayed in Ashland, and who I diagnosed before the doctors, has acquired diabetic neuropathy. This is likely brought on by environmental exposure, as well as the immunological hepatitis, which he got sharing needles with his dad, and who will likely outlive him since he is incarcerated for selling a violin; for what looks like several years, and the jail is known for being one of the worst in the nation. Link.
This seems the federal condition, and it can't sustain its own constituents by killing off the younger generation before they find out what had been done. I'm healthy, no drugs, i am an alcoholic by now, but my seizure disorder completely disappeared since this began 5 years ago, also. Though, seeing this has made it hard to ignore, and wholly biased, I feel shafted by the worlds byproduct of chemical refinement and unethical corporations. Don't get me started on the medical beauracracy, which seems an entity that is used for most of my now dead friends to get their fix.
I don't know this, but it's intuitive to make the idea into a normative belief. I just don't know how, and I'm without a explicit reason, it's like trying to prove covert racism.
I could just wait it out a few years, and the lives of lobbyists and politicians may be endangered. No realpolitik : no empathy : no intuition or knowledge : no system to fight : only the inhumane equivalent of ducks with their heads cut off. I can invest my time in bettering other lives, now, though. I really like mycology and ornithology, and there is a better ecosystem with fungi and birds. I took up smoking recently, as well. I can always post this to Facebook. Thanks for helping me get it out, not that it matters.
I think someone is ready for nappy time. He looks like he's putting himself to sleep.
if steven hocking is so smart y he cant walk
Voodoo Heart
so basicly he's gay?
Voodoo Heart
paris hilton makes more money in a day than i make in a year. does that make her smarter than me?
UltimateNakia so basically you're a piece of rubbish ?
Voodoo Heart
you do realize that paris hilton is literally famous because she was born into it, right? christ, you're almost as dumb as hockings
***** its so depressing when pretty girls turn out to be dumb fucks
Stephen is merely a man.Mans mind is a gift to use wisely and to understand life.Most important use is to know who created our 'blueprint' DNA. Read Psalm 14 vs.1 Since this audience gave a standing ovation it seems we had a roomfull of fools.
The psalms were also written by men, who also imagined a God. You, too, are just a credulous, frightened man.