God 'n robots.

Discuss philosophical concepts and moral issues.
Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

God 'n robots.

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Thu May 25, 2017 5:32 pm

Not sure if this belongs in R or P&M, after a bit of thought I think it's more appropriate for the latter (quite aside from the fact that I prefer P&M to the other fora).

So, anyway. Genesis chapter 1 tunes us a cool story, bro, about the creation. Six times, after each day's work, God is his own bestest critic. He sez, surveying his day's handiwork, "phwoaar, that's awesome."

(Interestingly, he does not reckon that's the case in the original hebrew texts, at least, not for the second day. Summat to do with fallen angels and mutiny and shit that happened that day). That possibly explains why nobody does Tuesdays very well.

On the sixth day, after surveying Adam's freshly minted virgin cock, he proclaims "phwoaaaar, that's FUCKING awesome!", which has set the tone for the proceedings of Catholic priests everywhere to this day.

Anyway, I digress. So, imagine a race of robots with genuine intelligence who can think and feel but are otherwise identical in capability. As humans, we look at the Mona Lisa and think that it is a brilliant and legendary piece of art. We think, "phwoaaar, that's awesome."

So how do we make this determination? The Mona Lisa is of course not unique in that aspect - the most pedestrian piece of art has some value and not necessarily for what it depicts, or the techniques and whatnot.

What sets a piece of artwork apart from other endeavours is that we admire the unique ability of the artist to do what no many others can do. That is what defines art. It is its reproducibility that defines its worth when compared to other artworks.

So if we have our hypothetical race of robots, would they be able to choose a notional Mona Lisa among their "artworks" and revere it from behind climate controlled bulletproof glass? For that matter, would they have any art at all? I will argue no, not because they are not capable of producing whimsical bits of ephemeral sculpture or music or whatnot, but because every member of such a robot society would be capable of it. There would be no standard of admiration based on ability, which is how we, as humans, judge artists and their works.

So here we have god reckoning, fuck, this shit I just done is good.

I can just imagine god standing there in front of his canvas with dirty smock and hipster peruvian llama pube beret, eyeing his handiwork and fiddling here and there until he thinks, damn I'm goood.

Now, this strikes me as total bollocks. How could an omnipotent god make any sort of value judgment on what it does? To state that something is good, you have to compare it with something of lesser value, or "the bad". Does that mean that our omnipotent god fucked up, and our existence is Mk.17 or 18? How about an infinity of marks? How would our omnipotent god know that this version was the real deal, ready for the galleries and syndication? You can't say that it's because he's omnipotent, because then he wouldn't have fucked up beforehand.

And if he just did it right the first time, surely it's rather tautological to claim that it's good if that is axiomatically the case? Or is our li'l god just a bit of an egomaniac with a bad case of the Dunnings and who likes posing in the mirror, talking to himself about how fuckin awesome he is doing shit that should just be a femtosecond's worth of work, not to mention six bloody days?

And of course then he needs to rest, because, ya know, omnipotent entities need their beauty sleep after close on a week's hard graft.
Last edited by Abominable Intelligence on Thu May 25, 2017 5:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
subsymbolic
Posts: 13371
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 6:29 pm
Location: under the gnomon

Post by subsymbolic » Thu May 25, 2017 9:17 pm

Surely this is the 'you have to know good to know bad, pain to know pleasure and so on move'. I've never quite seen the force of such claims but I'm willing to be schooled.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Thu May 25, 2017 9:30 pm

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]That is what defines art. It is its reproducibility that defines its worth when compared to other artworks.[/quote]Does it?

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 3:25 am

[quote=""subsymbolic""]Surely this is the 'you have to know good to know bad, pain to know pleasure and so on move'. I've never quite seen the force of such claims but I'm willing to be schooled.[/quote]

Sadly, school's out because I happen to agree with you. It however just isn't quite what I'm getting at.

Being omnipotent, god supposedly knows the difference between good and bad. Nodding to himself that the day's work was good, what is he comparing it to? Even if it is to a "mental image" of a bad day's work, it still amounts to him saying, jesus christ thank god I didn't fuck that up, it came out pretty okay even if I say so myself.

Which is absurd coming from an omnipotent entity.

We'll get to the balance of good vs bad stuff in due time (that is, if god is omnipotent he is capable of infinite good and infinite evil)

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 3:29 am

[quote=""Hermit""]
Abominable Intelligence;672002 wrote:That is what defines art. It is its reproducibility that defines its worth when compared to other artworks.
Does it?[/QUOTE]

It does. Don't mention it.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 3:33 am

Haha. I just thought of something else that tickles me. Is God capable of blaspheming, being omnipotent?

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 4:22 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]
Hermit;672015 wrote:
Abominable Intelligence;672002 wrote:That is what defines art. It is its reproducibility that defines its worth when compared to other artworks.
Does it?
It does.[/QUOTE]So, if a million da Vincis painted a million Mona Lisas, none of them would be a brilliant piece of art. Brilliance is a matter of quantity rather than quality. Got it.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 4:37 am

If everyone had an original Mona Lisa hanging on their wall at home, would anyone bother to encase one of them behind bulletproof glass at the Louvre or wherever it is being displayed?

No, they wouldn't.

More to the point (which you seem to be missing), if everyone could paint a Mona Lisa, there would be no relative merit to be used as a standard for admiration. So "brilliance" is precisely the metric being used; the fact is you can't have any sort of brilliance if you don't have the mediocre to compare it with.

ETA - so how this relates to the OP - if god is everything everywhere all the time, there is no relative metric with which to state that the day's work was good. It is what it is.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 5:07 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]If everyone had an original Mona Lisa hanging on their wall at home, would anyone bother to encase one of them behind bulletproof glass at the Louvre or wherever it is being displayed?

No, they wouldn't.

More to the point (which you seem to be missing), if everyone could paint a Mona Lisa, there would be no relative merit to be used as a standard for admiration. So "brilliance" is precisely the metric being used; the fact is you can't have any sort of brilliance if you don't have the mediocre to compare it with.

ETA - so how this relates to the OP - if god is everything everywhere all the time, there is no relative metric with which to state that the day's work was good. It is what it is.[/quote]Rightio, got it the first time around. Brilliance is a matter of quantity rather than quality. Bat that makes God's creation of the universe the pinnacle of, um, creation. Ultra rare. Incomparably rare. Incomparably brilliant.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 5:15 am

And yet he makes a value judgment on it.

And it's not a matter of quantity vs quality. The point is that quality becomes a meaningless metric if you cannot measure it by dint of it not having any relativity. I might as well say that the universe is incomparably shyte and the truth value of that statement is equally intact.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 7:01 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]I might as well say that the universe is incomparably shyte and the truth value of that statement is equally intact.[/quote]Quite so. The Mona Lisa is incomparably shyte.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 7:14 am

:p icard:

No, it isn't. Why?

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 7:17 am

Because quality becomes a meaningless metric if you cannot measure it by dint of it not having any relativity.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 7:22 am

Yes. And?

Does the Mona Lisa have a measurable level of quality compared to other works?

Q.E.D.

The suspense must be killing you.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 7:37 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]Does the Mona Lisa have a measurable level of quality compared to other works?[/quote]No.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 7:44 am

Your attempted impersonation of Ozy isn't very convincing.

Why then is it being climate controlled behind bulletproof glass? Because someone feels like it? Pish.

dancer_rnb
Posts: 5241
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 3:38 pm

Post by dancer_rnb » Fri May 26, 2017 9:11 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]And yet he makes a value judgment on it.

And it's not a matter of quantity vs quality. The point is that quality becomes a meaningless metric if you cannot measure it by dint of it not having any relativity. I might as well say that the universe is incomparably shyte and the truth value of that statement is equally intact.[/quote]

Yeah, but we're better than the last universe before the Big Bang. Or the one displaced one dimension.
There is no such thing as "politically correct." It's code for liberalism. The whole idea of "political correctness" was a brief academic flash-in-the-pan in the early 1990's, but has been a good conservative bugaboo ever since.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 9:20 am

Argumentum ad novitatem!!!!1!11!! :mad:

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 9:24 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]Why then is it being climate controlled behind bulletproof glass?[/quote]
Image

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 9:34 am

Listen, while I appreciate the kind offer of assistance, I am fully capable of fucking up threads on my own. So are ya gonna tackle the question instead of showing us how the pope gets to the woods to take a shit?

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 10:35 am

[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]I am fully capable of fucking up threads on my own.[/quote]
Yeah. As if that was news.
[quote=""Abominable Intelligence""]So are ya gonna tackle the question[/quote]
I have answered your question "Why then is it being climate controlled behind bulletproof glass?" You haven't noticed, though, so I'll answer it a second time:

Image

Let me know when the penny drops. If it drops.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 10:45 am

So your response to having been shown up as not being able to distinguish your arse from your face is to derail the thread?

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 10:56 am

You asked a question. I answered it. There's not a lot I can do about you thinking it means I cannot distinguish my arse from my face and that I derail the thread.

Abominable Intelligence
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 1:58 pm

Post by Abominable Intelligence » Fri May 26, 2017 11:33 am

Hermit. Kindly fuck off if you are unable to contribute.

Thank you.

Now fuck off.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 6129
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:34 pm

Post by Hermit » Fri May 26, 2017 12:20 pm

Sorry. I did not realise that your questions are rhetorical.

Post Reply