i conclude my blogs addressing excerpts from cregg’s book with this lengthy one. It is my hope AND PRAYER THAT THESE BLOGS HAVE ENCOURAGED YOU IN UNDERSTANDING BOTH THE BENEFITS AND DEFICIENCIES OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AS APPLIED TO COMPUTERS. IT IS A REMARKABLE ADVANCEMENT OF TECHNOLOGY, BUT THESE BLOGS POINT OUT HOW THE IMMATERIAL HUMAN MIND SIMPLY CANNOT BE PROGRAMMED INTO A COMPUTER, NOT EVEN A QUANTUM COMPUTER ON A MORE THAN LIKELY BASIS. aRTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CANNOT EQUATE WITH THE CREATIVE INTELLIGENCE OF THE HUMAN MIND, CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF THE MIND OF gOD! THIS BLOG POST IS TAKEN FROM PAGES 296-297 IN CREGG’S OUTSTANDING, THOUGHT PROVOKING BOOK.
“REMEMBER HOW I SHOWED yOU LAST NIGHT THAT RODIN ULTIMATELY THINKS THE WAY IT’S BEEN PROGRAMMED TO?
“YEAH.
“THIS DEMONSTRATION GETS TO THE HEART OF WHY WE CAN NEVER PROGRam a machine to be autonomously creative. it’s because true autonomy is an attribute of an agent who possesses genuine free will. and as far as we know, that kind of agent is only known to exist in a metaphysical sense - it cannot be empirically detected or, for that matter, doesn’t even seem logically coherent. but we all know from our own subjective experiences that human beings are such agents.
“there is no biological equivalent of a prewritten software program that is stored in, and runs on, the wetware of our brains. no neuroscientist alive can tell you what comprises, or is responsible for, the existence of our conscious selves.
“every computer programmer knows you can’t reproduce what you cannot define,” sam continued. “oh sure, we’ve done an amazing job of simulating aspects of intelligence. as you know, we’ve gotten to the point of fooling the vast majority of people who converse with our machines into believing they’re talking to another person. but in the end, our software doesn’t intuitively understand what a word is or how to use it like our brains do because we don’t have a clue how it’s done.
“this is part of the hard problem of consciousness; the subjective reality we all experience. it’s hard because no one has any idea how our minds grasp the meanings of things or how experiences invoke emotions that inspire us to write poetry or paint masterpieces. those emotions are essential to give depth and perspective to our experience.
. . . “we take all of that for granted in our daily lives. but to software developers who think that they can duplicate it in a computer, it’s what i’ve known all along - it’s impossible to achieve because we simply have no way to digitally reproduce an immaterial entity like consciousness.
“whatever we call AI, we will never be able to artificially recreate human consciousness unless we can do two things. first, we must write a practical, non-circular definition of it. and second, we must understand how our physical brains interact with it [the focus of my over 25 years of apologetics research presented in my books and blog posts]. until then, the best we’ll ever be able to come up with are just chinese rooms that is, elaborate pattern recognition algorithms.”
. . . “then sam broke the silence. ‘i’m pretty sure that right before he died, carl would have anticipated the results of our little experiment here. his test the day he crashed rodin along with something he wrote to me tells me he had dramatically changed his entire outlook on not just that, but on life in general.”
again, i thank jeff cregg for giving me permission to present parts of his thought provoking book in these several blogs. if they have stimulated critical thoughts, do obtain and read it. it is applicable in our time, identifying the reality of dualist interactionism between the immaterial mind of man, and of god, and the material components of the synaptic networks of the human brain. this creation by god enables us to commune bidirectionally with the holy spirit in our time.