Simulated persons

[johnnycatholic]

I recently watched a documentary on time travel in which the physicists eventually came to the conclusion that no one could travel back in time further than the moment a time machine was activated. They instead said that people would try to view the past by creating a computer program which totally replicated reality at a certain time which had simulations of people that were totally the same as real people in respect to emotions, sense of self, religous desire etc…They conjectured that if such was the case then a computer program could be cranking out billions of simulations so it would be more likely than not that we are simulated persons rather than real.
THe religious implications of such a possibility to me can be boiled down to these questions:
Would such a person created by a computer program to be the exact replica of a person with abilities like self sacrifce and compassion, have a soul? Would an artificially intelligent being with human emotions have a soul?

 

[masterjedi747]

They instead said that people would try to view the past by creating a computer program which totally replicated reality at a certain time which had simulations of people that were totally the same as real people in respect to emotions, sense of self, religious desire etc…

That’s… incredibly absurd. And it sounds deterministic.

No rational modern physicist in the world would grant that you could create “a computer program which totally replicated reality at a certain time”… people included or not.

So this “time travel” would work… how? By rewinding the mechanical motions of every atom in the universe as far back as we desired? Simply not possible, because atoms don’t work like that. We don’t live in a deterministic universe.

They conjectured that if such was the case then a computer program could be cranking out billions of simulations so it would be more likely than not that we are simulated persons rather than real.

Don’t bother yourself worrying about such an absurd scenario.

Would such a person, created by a computer program to be the exact replica of a person with abilities like self sacrifce and compassion, have a soul?

I’m going to assume you’re talking about an immortal/spiritual soul here.

If it were only a simulation, then no, it would not be a person. It would be a simulated person. If it were a real person, then yes, it would have a soul with an intellect and a free will… and would not be a simulation.

Would an artificially intelligent being with human emotions have a soul?

Artificial intelligence is, by definition… artificial. So no. But if it were truly intelligent, then, well yeah, it would have an intellect, and therefore a spiritual soul.

 

[johnnycatholic]

I agree the scenario is absurd as it relies on a comuter capable of processing an infinite amount of info.

Well if said being has these abilities then does that mean that God gave it a soul or the programmer?

 

[masterjedi747]

Well if said being has these abilities then does that mean that God gave it a soul or the programmer?

If it is truly a rational person, and not just a simulation, then it’s spiritual soul could only have come from God. Every spiritual soul is directly created by God, ex nihilo, and can’t be created any other way. To be a person is to be created in the image of God, and only God can do so.

 

[Hastrman]

If it is truly a rational person, and not just a simulation, then it’s spiritual soul could only have come from God. Every spiritual soul is directly created by God, ex nihilo, and can’t be created any other way. To be a person is to be created in the image of God, and only God can do so.

Arguably every soul, physical or material, is directly created by God (=Being) when whatever-it’s-the-soul-of comes into being, since the soul is only that which makes the thing what it is. Human souls (“spiritual” souls) are special in being subsistent, that is, they are actual without having to have all their other parts.

As for this “documentary”…what the Sam Scratch were they on when they wrote it? Time travel’s not possible because turning around in the fourth dimension makes things turn inside out (left gloves become right gloves, also), and because normal matter moving backward through time is, at least from the quantum physics standpoint, apparently identical with antimatter.

Or so I hear. That second one sounds really fishy to me. Could be something required by M-theory, though, I suppose.

 

[CollegeBoi1985]

I have heard this argument and variations of it before.

If one is in a simulation or a simulation itself, (IF that could ever happen) then one wouldn’t have a soul. A soul is immaterial and can only be created by God.

If you have a soul, you can be sure you are not a sim. I don’t think science will EVER be able to “simulate” reality, because reality is far too complex, with every atom, physical law, etc.

 

[Wildgraywolf]

I have heard this argument and variations of it before.

If one is in a simulation or a simulation itself, (IF that could ever happen) then one wouldn’t have a soul. A soul is immaterial and can only be created by God.

If you have a soul, you can be sure you are not a sim. I don’t think science will EVER be able to “simulate” reality, because reality is far too complex, with every atom, physical law, etc.

Yup, only God has the power to truly create the best everybody else can do is to manipulate matter.

There’s a story that might put my thoughts into perspective… There once was a scientist who challenged God that he could create life out of dirt the same way God did in the beginning. And God said “Oh really, let’s see you do that.”. Just as the scientist was getting started God hollers out “woah, hold it, go make you own dirt”.

 

[JimG]

I am reminded of the robots and androids in Asimov’s robot novels, whose “positronic brains” result in a level of rational thought equivalent to if not superior to, human minds.

Now, I don’t think that the science of robotics or artificial intelligence could actually make a being that seemed to have the human characteristics of intellect and will (with the 3 Laws fitting in there somehow.) If such a thing were possible, either humans would have to abandon the idea of human distinctiveness, or the robots would begin to think that they too had immortal souls. I think the latter more likely. If they did have immortal souls, however, those souls would have been created by God.

 

[Dameedna]

I recently watched a documentary on time travel in which the physicists eventually came to the conclusion that no one could travel back in time further than the moment a time machine was activated. They instead said that people would try to view the past by creating a computer program which totally replicated reality at a certain time which had simulations of people that were totally the same as real people in respect to emotions, sense of self, religous desire etc…They conjectured that if such was the case then a computer program could be cranking out billions of simulations so it would be more likely than not that we are simulated persons rather than real.
THe religious implications of such a possibility to me can be boiled down to these questions:
Would such a person created by a computer program to be the exact replica of a person with abilities like self sacrifce and compassion, have a soul? Would an artificially intelligent being with human emotions have a soul?

This is directly related to Simulation Theory.

It is not a theory that has as yet been debuncted by philosophy or science, though it is not given a huge amount of energy at this point. It is consiered a minor possibility.

The real question, is wether we can “program” conciousness. If we can, then the soul probably doesn’t exist, but we also probably wont’ ever know that for sure, so continue on as you please

 

[Nullasalus]

The real question, is wether we can “program” conciousness. If we can, then the soul probably doesn’t exist, but we also probably wont’ ever know that for sure, so continue on as you please

I actually question this. Everyone talks about ‘soul’ as if it’s an utterly defined and explored concept, without realizing that the very concept is subject to some heavy debate and philosophical/theological consideration, even within the Catholic Church.

I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to verify if a machine programmed to act like a human has consciousness the way we mean it, much less a soul. But I’d have absolutely no problem accepting that we exist both in a simulation of sorts, and that souls are real.

 

[brandymmiller]

Artificial intelligence is, by definition… artificial. So no. But if it were truly intelligent, then, well yeah, it would have an intellect, and therefore a spiritual soul.

Having an intellect does not equate to having a soul. After all, there are many astoundingly intelligent animals (elephants, dolphins, birds) yet the Church teaches that they do not have a soul.

 

[CollegeBoi1985]

I actually question this. Everyone talks about ‘soul’ as if it’s an utterly defined and explored concept, without realizing that the very concept is subject to some heavy debate and philosophical/theological consideration, even within the Catholic Church.

I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to verify if a machine programmed to act like a human has consciousness the way we mean it, much less a soul. But I’d have absolutely no problem accepting that we exist both in a simulation of sorts, and that souls are real.

I believe you are mistaken, the church has openly declared the existence of the soul as both an article of faith and a reality discoverable by the intellect. If human beings have no soul, there is no reason we have a savior, for our ETERNAL salvation is dependant upon our eternal existence. Also, there could be no reason for a resurrection of the body if we did not have a soul, if we did not have an aspect of “self” which survived the death of the body, that would be like God recreating an entirely new being, of which the individual “self” would be lost with death. The soul is a bit difficult to describe, partly I think because it transcends the physical reality, but it is recognizable chiefly in the fact of one’s consciousness, or self and in knowing that one knows. Not merely having data, but knowing data. Recognizing that there is a self which is coming to know.

A machine being able to duplicate that is highly debatable and is interesting, if one is Christian, we are obliged to believe that a machine could ever be imbued with a sense of self, a personality and able to combine vast amounts of data in a human (a being with a sense of self, which displays that sense) way. The soul is absolutely necessary for such things.

 

[Hastrman]

Having an intellect does not equate to having a soul. After all, there are many astoundingly intelligent animals (elephants, dolphins, birds) yet the Church teaches that they do not have a soul.

It also teaches that they don’t have intellect properly so called, since they lack the ability to form concepts.

 

[Nullasalus]

I believe you are mistaken, the church has openly declared the existence of the soul as both an article of faith and a reality discoverable by the intellect. If human beings have no soul, there is no reason we have a savior, for our ETERNAL salvation is dependant upon our eternal existence.

What I’m saying is that the Church teaches that we have a soul, that the soul is immortal - but as you said, it is ‘difficult to describe’. As far as I see, the teachings regarding the soul are primarily fleshed out in what it means - we can survive a bodily death, we can expect a bodily resurrection, etc. But specifics are up to debate - just take a look at what Aquinas has to say about the soul, versus what most people think the soul is, versus what the catechism (vaguely) defines as certain truth with regards to the soul.

Either way, I still see no reason to believe that a simulated reality means we have no soul. It would be a new question to grapple with, but that’s hardly a threat.

 

[brandymmiller]

What I am saying is that a soul is a gift from God, which human beings were given when He “breathed life” into us. While I do not say it is impossible for God to give that same gift to a simulated person, since with God all things are possible and He may certainly do as He pleases with His gifts, I do say it is not a certainty.

 

[AndyF]

JimG:

I think eventually God willing, man will be able to create aware mobile machines.

In a creature other than man, the primary purpose of the soul is to animate, therefore a soulless android would already have his animation provided by a nuclear engine of some sort.

The major restriction to this science is the huge programming and bench testing process, and the IC technology which needs to become much smaller still to incorporate a larger memory capacity. CPU speed seems to be adequate.

If you want to see something scary, see Honda’s “Azimo”, which on one test, this walking machine was left in a room full of hazards and was instructed to fetch an object in the center of the room. The door was closed and on reopening he had fetched the ball through a maze of problems and “figured” how to retreive the object himself.

This machine will eventually ponder it’s existence and ask us all kinds of questions. Our attitude will be the same as to each other, labeling some heretics, and scolding them when they complain about their servile existence. It will wonder why we are not accountable to ourselves, and are never consistent, and in particular we will cause them great grief when we insist on a standard of perfection in them that we know and bares out to be unattainable.

But we will obtain great delight in seeing them scramble in some vast game of snakes and ladders, and we will place our bets on one that looks like a winner. And we will on creation label models zx21’s as reprobate, and zx22’s as elect.

When our days with them is complete and they are all sent to the scrap heap, we will collect all the zx22’s and turn on their switches once again, maybe placing some pleasure switches they never knew they had as a reward, and melt down the zx21’s for not becoming models zx22’s, as if by the “perfection” standard we imposed, it were possible to do so. We will pretend surprise when lo and behold, we were right all along, the zx21’s did indeed fail.

AndyF