At around 15 minutes, when she said, “I don’t know father, I guess my answer kind of sucks” and fr pine goes on to help, I couldn’t help but feel she said that intentionally, as if to prove a point: speech is about communion, and, like she said earlier, humility. Our failure in logic or speech (or anything else) allows for the “intercession” of other speech unto charity; one speech completes the other and no speech is really complete without all others (we are made for communion!) AI imitates this by storing billions of “conversations” within itself and playing them out - but it can never hold the entirety of a persons’s speech, nor can it experience the weight of shame and the joy of charity when giving and receiving speech. I think…
And then it creates a vicious cycle. We use AI, which “makes life easy”, but it removes the opportunity to give/receive charity. This creates buckets of people to whom charity isn’t modeled. They no longer have the capacity to give or receive it, and effectively removes charity from communication altogether. Communication without charity is a scary thing, since it requires vulnerability. If we know our vulnerability won’t be met with charity, a logical response is to remove the chance of our being hurt should we be misunderstood /found to be in error. And since ChatGPT and Google can give us the “right” words and “right” answers….we end up right where we started. Using AI for convenience, but at the expense of love for another. Certainly we need courage to enter into good conversation, but I can see how the demands of time take away opportunities to cultivate that virtue. For example: Having to wait two weeks for birthday party RSVP’s forces you to enter into an uncomfortable place of doubt and fear. Self-love may come into question in the interim. But you have to exist in that scary place to in order to come up with a plan to overcome it. You have to enlist the love of parents/family, and they will affirm your worth. Mindful exercises and contemplation help to get yourself out of your head and into reality: “Sally still hasn’t gotten back to me yet, she must hate me! enter mindfuless Oh wait, that’s right - her family is on vacation and she just hasn’t gotten the invitation yet.” The delay in your guests’ responses allows regular exercises like these to occur, and they heal us and grow our courage. But if people are replying back immediately, we no longer have to enter into those scary, fearful places. There’s no time for doubt to enter into the situation, and so need to practice the cultivation of courage. Leaving our tanks of courageousness on empty when it comes time to engage with another. Anyway, that all made sense to me. Especially out loud….translating to written word is just UGH. xD Anyway. This made sense to me when I said it out loud xD 1
This is important topic for me as one who's part of designing user interfaces leveraging generative AI.. please pray for me and all of us in this industry that we grow in prudence. Thanks.
Thanks for this talk! You are two beautiful and intelligent souls. Although, I have to admit that I had to Google search the definition of some of the words you used. Which is somewhat ironic when you are discussing overwhelming technological advancement! Thanks again for this wonderful podcast.
Just a thought, the exercise of the intellect and will is akin to exercising a muscle wherein it strengthens the more you use and put weight on it. The more you substitute its use for something else, a more convenient tool, for instance, the more it degenerates. And once its use is required it will not endure much. Those who have already strengthened themselves might be able to use the tool more effectively as they know to use it only for a purpose. Those who haven't strengthened themselves first will likely just substitute their will or muscle for the tool and might not even realize they need to exercise their faculties as well. This thought might not have that much negative impact for muscles substituted for physical tools, but for the intellect and will this continuous substitution could be downright dangerous. Case in point: the kind of will needed for fasting, the marginal will to resist by drug addicts, the will to really think through a difficult problem, etc.... PS: the paragraph above was not constructed using AI. Maybe I ought to use it more. Or maybe I need to learn how to write better. 😅
Get out of my head Father Pine. I’ve been reflecting on social media and instant communication and it dawned on me…. I don’t think we’re meant to communicate this quickly or to know the random daily thoughts and activities of several dozen people. By this I mean people posting to their social media or having multiple text conversations simultaneously. Think back even 20 years, we still had to make phone calls, social media really wasn’t a thing yet. We even had to go home to check our email versus having it in the palm of our hands. And so I continue to meditate on the fallout and effect on our humanity
interesting one. tell you one thing, when we can form agent swarms, that dispatch other aspected selves, reaggregate them, and can have structure of deliberation between them...does that not sound like something youd very much want understanding things like thomist means of thought? you can ask one to read the entirity of a thing. better: make it listen via speech to text and analysis. anyways, must go breaking printing presses and factories. seems like putting ones head in the ground - we can accept ocurrances or defy them. this one may be hard to deny.
I am doing a Masters in Aquinas Studies at the moment so I decide to test out ChatGPT and asked it to draw up a reading list. One of the books it recommended "The Beauty of God: Theology and the Arts in Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Christianity" by Daniel B. Clendenin, does not actually exist. The author does not list it among his works though he has written on Orthodoxy. There are similar titles but not that actual book by that author. Can ChatGPT distinguish between real and imaginary objects?
Is chatgpt able to assist those born with a hearing deficit/loss as ASL is not sufficient language, for instance the same ASL means both potato and Ireland?
I asked ChatGPT that question and here is ChatGPTs answer: “Certainly! While text-based communication is the primary mode for ChatGPT, it can be a useful tool for individuals with hearing loss. If there are specific ways I can assist or topics you'd like information on, feel free to let me know!”
I largely disagree with this pessimistic view of generative AI and LLMs. It's one thing to criticize students in an academic setting using generative AI to complete their work, it's entirely another to also say it takes away from our humanity and to discourage its widespread use in society more broadly. The purpose of education is to impart knowledge and critical thinking skills to the student. The student is graded on their own personal performance and receives a diploma once their studies are completed. Of course completing assignments with AI would not accurately reflect the knowledge and ability of the student. The school is vouching that the student has a certain level of competence in a subject that qualified them for the diploma. Yet, this not to say there is no place for AI in education. It's very different utilizing AI in a way similar to having a peer review one's work, or bouncing ideas for a thesis off a professor, or going to a tutor, etc. than to wholesale ask AI to complete an entire assignment. So, for example, if one were an architectural student, sure the school would be wise to prohibit calculators and AI until a certain level of competence was reached. Then after a time, the school could allow the calculators but still prohibit AI until yet another level of verified competence was reached. And ultimately, once the requisites have all been learned, it makes sense to allow the students or employees, to utilize all available tools - including AI - to create the absolute best final work product while maintaining one's own artistic tastes. In our personal lives and in the work place the use of AI writ large, let alone LLMs and generative AI, is extremely helpful to humanity. It allows nearly every single segment of the economy to increase output exponentially thereby increasing our quality of lives and decreasing the costs of goods and services. It is already solving complex problems in medicine and science. The theological argument against AI also does not make sense to me. AI is a tool like any other, no matter how sophisticated it may seem and how different the problems it presents may be. Humans relying on AI to save time does not diminish our value. It actually allows each individual to increase their output and contributions to society. We can handle even more responsibilities and obtain even deeper insights than before because of AI. Our research will be more thorough, etc.
Well, back to the main question: Can Humans BUILD a Soul ? If A.I. can be created that is easily x40 times more intelligent than humans at performing tasks, is that machine now a person ? Does a hyper-intelligent A.I. have a Soul ? Legal Rights as a Person ? The Right to Vote ? The Right to Bill of Rights ? The Right to Reproduce ?
No, as a soul is the form of a living being. A soul is the principle of life behind why a thing is alive, it is what separates a living being from a non-living being. Since artifacts, machines, robots, androids, or whatever mechanical being in question does not possess a subsisting form of their own as a living being, and thus possessing a soul, but rather is an artificial man-made composition of independent and subsistent non-living tools and parts, unlike human beings and other living creatures, it would not possess a soul or living form, but would be an artificial assembly of non-living parts, regardless of apparent expression.
And it therefore follows they would not have the natural or civil rights or freedoms proper to human beings, but would be treated as non-living property, as that is what they actually are.
At around 15 minutes, when she said, “I don’t know father, I guess my answer kind of sucks” and fr pine goes on to help, I couldn’t help but feel she said that intentionally, as if to prove a point: speech is about communion, and, like she said earlier, humility. Our failure in logic or speech (or anything else) allows for the “intercession” of other speech unto charity; one speech completes the other and no speech is really complete without all others (we are made for communion!) AI imitates this by storing billions of “conversations” within itself and playing them out - but it can never hold the entirety of a persons’s speech, nor can it experience the weight of shame and the joy of charity when giving and receiving speech. I think…
And then it creates a vicious cycle. We use AI, which “makes life easy”, but it removes the opportunity to give/receive charity.
This creates buckets of people to whom charity isn’t modeled. They no longer have the capacity to give or receive it, and effectively removes charity from communication altogether.
Communication without charity is a scary thing, since it requires vulnerability. If we know our vulnerability won’t be met with charity, a logical response is to remove the chance of our being hurt should we be misunderstood /found to be in error.
And since ChatGPT and Google can give us the “right” words and “right” answers….we end up right where we started. Using AI for convenience, but at the expense of love for another.
Certainly we need courage to enter into good conversation, but I can see how the demands of time take away opportunities to cultivate that virtue.
For example: Having to wait two weeks for birthday party RSVP’s forces you to enter into an uncomfortable place of doubt and fear. Self-love may come into question in the interim. But you have to exist in that scary place to in order to come up with a plan to overcome it. You have to enlist the love of parents/family, and they will affirm your worth. Mindful exercises and contemplation help to get yourself out of your head and into reality: “Sally still hasn’t gotten back to me yet, she must hate me! enter mindfuless Oh wait, that’s right - her family is on vacation and she just hasn’t gotten the invitation yet.” The delay in your guests’ responses allows regular exercises like these to occur, and they heal us and grow our courage.
But if people are replying back immediately, we no longer have to enter into those scary, fearful places. There’s no time for doubt to enter into the situation, and so need to practice the cultivation of courage. Leaving our tanks of courageousness on empty when it comes time to engage with another.
Anyway, that all made sense to me. Especially out loud….translating to written word is just UGH. xD
Anyway. This made sense to me when I said it out loud xD
1
This is a profound comment
Congratulations Dr. Fr. Pine 🎓🎓🎓
This is important topic for me as one who's part of designing user interfaces leveraging generative AI.. please pray for me and all of us in this industry that we grow in prudence. Thanks.
Thanks for this talk! You are two beautiful and intelligent souls. Although, I have to admit that I had to Google search the definition of some of the words you used. Which is somewhat ironic when you are discussing overwhelming technological advancement! Thanks again for this wonderful podcast.
Just a thought, the exercise of the intellect and will is akin to exercising a muscle wherein it strengthens the more you use and put weight on it. The more you substitute its use for something else, a more convenient tool, for instance, the more it degenerates. And once its use is required it will not endure much. Those who have already strengthened themselves might be able to use the tool more effectively as they know to use it only for a purpose. Those who haven't strengthened themselves first will likely just substitute their will or muscle for the tool and might not even realize they need to exercise their faculties as well. This thought might not have that much negative impact for muscles substituted for physical tools, but for the intellect and will this continuous substitution could be downright dangerous. Case in point: the kind of will needed for fasting, the marginal will to resist by drug addicts, the will to really think through a difficult problem, etc....
PS: the paragraph above was not constructed using AI. Maybe I ought to use it more. Or maybe I need to learn how to write better. 😅
Get out of my head Father Pine. I’ve been reflecting on social media and instant communication and it dawned on me…. I don’t think we’re meant to communicate this quickly or to know the random daily thoughts and activities of several dozen people. By this I mean people posting to their social media or having multiple text conversations simultaneously. Think back even 20 years, we still had to make phone calls, social media really wasn’t a thing yet. We even had to go home to check our email versus having it in the palm of our hands. And so I continue to meditate on the fallout and effect on our humanity
interesting one. tell you one thing, when we can form agent swarms, that dispatch other aspected selves, reaggregate them, and can have structure of deliberation between them...does that not sound like something youd very much want understanding things like thomist means of thought? you can ask one to read the entirity of a thing. better: make it listen via speech to text and analysis. anyways, must go breaking printing presses and factories. seems like putting ones head in the ground - we can accept ocurrances or defy them. this one may be hard to deny.
I am doing a Masters in Aquinas Studies at the moment so I decide to test out ChatGPT and asked it to draw up a reading list. One of the books it recommended "The Beauty of God: Theology and the Arts in Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Christianity" by Daniel B. Clendenin, does not actually exist. The author does not list it among his works though he has written on Orthodoxy. There are similar titles but not that actual book by that author. Can ChatGPT distinguish between real and imaginary objects?
No, large language models have a serious issue with hallucinations. It is an active area of improvement.
Is chatgpt able to assist those born with a hearing deficit/loss as ASL is not sufficient language, for instance the same ASL means both potato and Ireland?
I asked ChatGPT that question and here is ChatGPTs answer:
“Certainly! While text-based communication is the primary mode for ChatGPT, it can be a useful tool for individuals with hearing loss. If there are specific ways I can assist or topics you'd like information on, feel free to let me know!”
I want to be stapled to the Lord too!
I largely disagree with this pessimistic view of generative AI and LLMs. It's one thing to criticize students in an academic setting using generative AI to complete their work, it's entirely another to also say it takes away from our humanity and to discourage its widespread use in society more broadly.
The purpose of education is to impart knowledge and critical thinking skills to the student. The student is graded on their own personal performance and receives a diploma once their studies are completed. Of course completing assignments with AI would not accurately reflect the knowledge and ability of the student. The school is vouching that the student has a certain level of competence in a subject that qualified them for the diploma. Yet, this not to say there is no place for AI in education. It's very different utilizing AI in a way similar to having a peer review one's work, or bouncing ideas for a thesis off a professor, or going to a tutor, etc. than to wholesale ask AI to complete an entire assignment.
So, for example, if one were an architectural student, sure the school would be wise to prohibit calculators and AI until a certain level of competence was reached. Then after a time, the school could allow the calculators but still prohibit AI until yet another level of verified competence was reached. And ultimately, once the requisites have all been learned, it makes sense to allow the students or employees, to utilize all available tools - including AI - to create the absolute best final work product while maintaining one's own artistic tastes.
In our personal lives and in the work place the use of AI writ large, let alone LLMs and generative AI, is extremely helpful to humanity. It allows nearly every single segment of the economy to increase output exponentially thereby increasing our quality of lives and decreasing the costs of goods and services. It is already solving complex problems in medicine and science.
The theological argument against AI also does not make sense to me. AI is a tool like any other, no matter how sophisticated it may seem and how different the problems it presents may be. Humans relying on AI to save time does not diminish our value. It actually allows each individual to increase their output and contributions to society. We can handle even more responsibilities and obtain even deeper insights than before because of AI. Our research will be more thorough, etc.
Well, back to the main question: Can Humans BUILD a Soul ? If A.I. can be created that is easily x40 times more intelligent than humans at performing tasks, is that machine now a person ? Does a hyper-intelligent A.I. have a Soul ? Legal Rights as a Person ? The Right to Vote ? The Right to Bill of Rights ? The Right to Reproduce ?
No, as a soul is the form of a living being. A soul is the principle of life behind why a thing is alive, it is what separates a living being from a non-living being. Since artifacts, machines, robots, androids, or whatever mechanical being in question does not possess a subsisting form of their own as a living being, and thus possessing a soul, but rather is an artificial man-made composition of independent and subsistent non-living tools and parts, unlike human beings and other living creatures, it would not possess a soul or living form, but would be an artificial assembly of non-living parts, regardless of apparent expression.
And it therefore follows they would not have the natural or civil rights or freedoms proper to human beings, but would be treated as non-living property, as that is what they actually are.