Steve Dustcircle

Unseen wrote:
@robert “Evil” is defined in different ways in different times, places, and communities. In Sparta, for example, it wasn’t evil to murder deformed or weak babies. Even today, is abortion evil? Depends who you ask, doesn’t it?

Evil in the context of a “loving, all powerful god” is all and any suffering that he could easily prevent…[Read more]

@Robert

“Evil” is defined in different ways in different times, places, and communities. In Sparta, for example, it wasn’t evil to murder deformed or weak babies. Even today, is abortion evil? Depends who you ask, doesn’t it?

Free will (as gifted by a loving god) as a way to explain away the problem of evil is such a provincial human excuse in stupidity. The idea that Adam and Eve lived in a perfect world without “evil” is stupid. There could be no evil tempting serpent, LOL. The idea that a single act of disobedience (as defined by a dictator) by one person (Eve)…[Read more]

The first line of my above post should read “The notion of free will has many problems,…” (emphasis mine)

The notion of free has many problems, the first one being defining it. And, of course, one of the easiest and least honest of ways of “solving” a problem is to define it away.

One of the dishonest ways of giving us free will is to define it in a way such as this: “If you can do something you want to do and no external person or force is making…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:

PopeBeanie wrote:
You define determinism as natural law, which is consistent with its standard use in science and philosophy: every event or state of affairs results from prior states according to fixed laws.

I realize I frame determinism that way but to be more precise every state of affairs is the result of its antecedents.…

[Read more]

PopeBeanie wrote:
We are endowed with an ability to predict (or at least speculate on) futures, even when the universe itself is, by nature, NOT endowed with that ability.

You could say the evolution as an unconscious process is making predictions as to what combinations of attributes will succeed in the future.

PopeBeanie wrote [while quoting ChatGPT]:
You could clarify what you mean by “external agent.” Predetermination does not require consciousness or an agent; it simply refers to outcomes being fully predictable given sufficient knowledge of a system’s initial conditions and laws. This applies even to purely physical processes.

I do want to clari…[Read more]

PopeBeanie wrote:
You define determinism as natural law, which is consistent with its standard use in science and philosophy: every event or state of affairs results from prior states according to fixed laws.

I realize I frame determinism that way but to be more precise every state of affairs is the result of its antecedents. Whatever happens is…[Read more]

LOL, IMO, you’re sounding more intelligent than the AI, in this case, as it looks like it’s just responding as basically as possible. Also, did you set it to respond to you more interactively, as it’s always asking for your opinion.

I’m still only at a basic level, and am interested in the wave collapse as if entangled particles must exist on a…[Read more]

@PopeBeanie  – Although I don’t see how discussion of quantum level dynamics can possibly shed light on classic level physics, a new question has come to my mind that I can ask ChatGPT about: What, if any theories propose what the nature of quantum entanglement could have been on a macro scale at the big bang?

That is very similar to a ‘c…[Read more]

You can download a free ChatGPT app for your phone. Just select the voice you want to converse with and press the microphone button.

Android one is here

jakelafort wrote:
I want to know what the thinker thinks.

Like Peter Griffin on ecstacy:  “how are you doing that?”

jakelafort wrote:
any LLM like Chat gpt or meta

Dang, can’t believe I didn’t think of that.

I always tell people to ask it questions in a way that you’d try to ask human experts. What’s been written on the net by humans is what LLCs draw from to formulate answers. (But sometimes it’s inaccurate, like humans can be… but it listens to your…[Read more]

@Unapologetic – get it from here.

Most personality tests are bunk. Whenever I am an employer I always meet potential staff face to face. Using AI (non human) is a waste of time. Why employ someone you never met?

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
But the personality trait pages are dumb. Worse than the Myers Brigg test which is Woo.

I can understand that employers want certain personality traits and qualities, like professionalism, initiative, communication skills, agreeableness, conscientiousness.  But I don’t see how AI can dig those out.