Will computers have souls?
The “ghost in the machine” is a philosophical argument, or at least a response to another. But, as we move forward into a brave new world of machines that can think independently, why not impute the concept of soulfulness into the fabric of the nano-chip?
At the dawn of the last century, the concept of the computer was non-existent. Today, I talk to you on one and you access my blog with one. So, think of the leap from the Wright Brothers and Alexander Bell etc., to now, then add 100 years! Why not a soul soon? We seem to place conscious limits to our imaginations when it comes to what our man-made machines are capable.
At the University of Toronto in the early 80s I was exposed to the Cray computer — a real dinosaur today, but not then. For the longest time, computers like the Cray, and IBM’s Big Blue, could only perform “grunt work”, heavy lifting, number crunching – brute force computations. But these are only early generation machines.
Today, technology expert Ken Rutkowski (www.kenradio.com) joined us form L.A. to discuss the latest in technology in what is developing at exponential rates underneath us, and in our living rooms. And while he didn’t reflect upon talking computers this time or computers attaining a level of self-consciousness, he did discuss the fabulous interface of consumer culture and high-tech.
Voice mail is dead, he proclaims, and Ken provides these web sites as examples Spinvox,
, PhoneTag , Yap and Jott .
He also mentioned that old tech items, such as “walkie-talkies” can now have a 50 mile radius — for next to nothing price-wise. And in a time where your text messages will now cost you, anything that can save money is a help.
I began the blog today, and my broadcast this morning, with the discussion of souls, and soulfulness, and whether or not the Catholic Church should embrace the Church of England’s approach when it comes to the ordination of women as Bishops.
Are women spiritual equals? Shoud we have a female Pope?
Callers pointed out to tradition, Literalists pointed to the “word of God”. Controversial Christian Gretta Vosper (“With or Without God” author) challenged us by saying traditons are shackles and anyone who says that they are literalists have not really read the Bible! According to Vosper, when it comes to the Bible, we all cherry-pick, we are all selective; that to accept all aspects of the Good Book in its totality is to run into contradiciton and absurdity.
Perhaps the most challenging thing Gretta Vosper posed today is why would God create a species of fallible sinners and then sacrifice his only son to pay for it? Why kill to redeem in the first place? Why create sin?
Turning to the future, I wonder if computers will ever attain self-consciousness, and, if so, what God they will choose, and whom they might sacrifice?
iPod or iGod?
July 14th, 2008 at 9:27 am
The modern Church would be a place for like minded folks to welcome others, discuss standards of morality, encourage and assist each other to succeed, help others who are less fortunate and celebrate our histories. The Church has set standards and guidelines for us to follow, that doesn’t mean that the Science fiction parts of the bible were meant to be taken literally thousands of years later. Gretta Vosper and John Shelby Spong shoud be congratulated for having the courage and the intelligence to try and bring the church into modern times.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Andrew,
I listened to your show on the day you had Vosper talking about the issue of female leadership in the Church. Would it not be appropriate to also have someone on your show that is supported the male-only leadership in the Church or who accepted the Bible as the Word of God? Everything Vosper said that supposedly was flawed about the authority of the Bible can be rationally explained and shown how her views were erroneous. Even some of your callers who support the authority of Scripture did not have sound arguments. It made us look like simple fools who believe a fairy tale. This is hardly the case.