Will machines completely replace all human beings?

This is the main board for discussing philosophy - formal, informal and in between.

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 4:27 am

Arminius wrote:Do you remember my last post or did you not read it? All we need to know in order to post in this thread is that humans are living beings and machines are no living beings, thus that humans and machines are not the same. Additionally we know e.g. that humans created, create, and will create machines, including the first of those machines that created, create, and will create machines. There are similarities and analogies between humans and machines, of course, but these similarities and analogies do not change the fact that humans and machines are different. If humans and machines were the same (and of course: they are not the same!), then we would not have (for example) words like "cyborg" and "android", we also would not need any difference in the meaning of the words "human" and "machine", thus one of both words or even both words could - and would (!) - vanish. Saying "humans and machines are the same" is similar to the wording "humans and gods are the same" - both statements are false. But this falsity does not change the fact that humans want to be gods and to create something that is better than humans are.


Arminus,

It is still not clear what you are suggesting. What do you eaxtly mean by life or living organism? What would be the difference between a human and an android according to you? Is inclusion of any pure mechanical device in the humans is enough call them andriods? Is a human having his knee joint replaced by an artificial one worthy enough to be called an android? Or, he should has something else?

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Thu Apr 23, 2015 7:10 am

Science has accepted that a "human" or "homosapian" is anything founded on an RNA/DNA sequencing that can mate with a homosapian and reproduce (bear an offspring).

Even if artificially produced, if anything, mechanical or not, can do the above, it is "human". Otherwise it is merely machine, artificial, incongruent, or a different species.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:52 am

James S Saint wrote:Science has accepted that a "human" or "homosapian" is anything founded on an RNA/DNA sequencing that can mate with a homosapian and reproduce (bear an offspring).

Even if artificially produced, if anything, mechanical or not, can do the above, it is "human". Otherwise it is merely machine, artificial, incongruent, or a different species.


Okay.

Is the definition of the LIFE the same?

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:14 pm

zinnat13 wrote:Is the definition of the LIFE the same?

Of course not. Ants are "alive".

The definition of "life" still varies but basically encompasses self-preservation and reproduction. Reproduction is actually a method of self-preservation, not independent of it. The inherent intent of reproduction is to form harmonious surroundings. Reproducing nanobots serve that function, but seldom (if ever yet) enact self-preservation, although it wouldn't take all that much to include it.

Some military drones enact self-preservation but can't reproduce .. yet. Combine the two of those and you have a truly living machine; "Replicators" (as displayed in sci-fi films).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:23 pm

James S Saint wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:Is the definition of the LIFE the same?

Of course not. Ants are "alive".

The definition of "life" still varies but basically encompasses self-preservation and reproduction. Reproduction is actually a method of self-preservation, not independent of it. The inherent intent of reproduction is to form harmonious surroundings. Reproducing nanobots serve that function, but seldom (if ever yet) enact self-preservation, although it wouldn't take all that much to include it.

Some military drones enact self-preservation but can't reproduce .. yet. Combine the two of those and you have a truly living machine; "Replicators" (as displayed in sci-fi films).


James,

Does your definition not suggest that plants are also Live?
Or not!

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:33 pm

zinnat13 wrote:Does your definition not suggest that plants are also Live?
Or not!

Yes. How is that an issue?
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:56 pm

James S Saint wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:Does your definition not suggest that plants are also Live?
Or not!

Yes. How is that an issue?


Do they have mind or consciousness too?

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Thu Apr 23, 2015 12:58 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
James S Saint wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:Does your definition not suggest that plants are also Live?
Or not!

Yes. How is that an issue?


Do they have consciousness too?

With love,
Sanjay

No.

Consciousness requires remote recognition. Plants don't do that.
But some drones do.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:05 pm

If plants do not have ether consciousness or mind, how they make decisions?

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby GreatandWiseTrixie » Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:40 pm

zinnat13 wrote:If plants do not have ether consciousness or mind, how they make decisions?

With love,
Sanjay


Plants dont make decisions and neither do humans. Plants just "do" things.
I am losing my mind to mandess.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2136
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:02 pm

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:If plants do not have ether consciousness or mind, how they make decisions?

With love,
Sanjay


Plants dont make decisions and neither do humans. Plants just "do" things.


Well, that is neither a philosophical nor scientific explanation. It is like saying that the God created this universe, just because he does that. No further deduction is required.

By the way, have you ever seen sunflower plant moving the face of its flower towards the sun all the time?

Is that not a conscious decision, taken collectively by the whole of the plant?

If sunflower plant does not has any collective and conscious decision making portion, how could it ever be do such act?

And, remember also, unlike animals and humans, plants do not have any central nervous system. So, how its different portions cummunicate and synchronise with each other?

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby GreatandWiseTrixie » Thu Apr 23, 2015 2:26 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:If plants do not have ether consciousness or mind, how they make decisions?

With love,
Sanjay


Plants dont make decisions and neither do humans. Plants just "do" things.


Well, that is neither a philosophical nor scientific explanation. It is like saying that the God created this universe, just because he does that. No further deduction is required.

By the way, have you ever seen sunflower plant moving the face of its flower towards the sun all the time?

Is that not a conscious decision, taken collectively by the whole of the plant?

If sunflower plant does not has any collective and conscious decision making portion, how could it ever be do such act?

And, remember also, unlike animals and humans, plants do not have any central nervous system. So, how its different portions cummunicate and synchronise with each other?

With love,
Sanjay

dude its just some chemicals moving down the vine causing it to rotate for the photoreceptors
I am losing my mind to mandess.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2136
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 3:44 pm

GWT,

I do not think that you are able to understand the issue.

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Thu Apr 23, 2015 4:32 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
Arminius wrote:Do you remember my last post or did you not read it? All we need to know in order to post in this thread is that humans are living beings and machines are no living beings, thus that humans and machines are not the same. Additionally we know e.g. that humans created, create, and will create machines, including the first of those machines that created, create, and will create machines. There are similarities and analogies between humans and machines, of course, but these similarities and analogies do not change the fact that humans and machines are different. If humans and machines were the same (and of course: they are not the same!), then we would not have (for example) words like "cyborg" and "android", we also would not need any difference in the meaning of the words "human" and "machine", thus one of both words or even both words could - and would (!) - vanish. Saying "humans and machines are the same" is similar to the wording "humans and gods are the same" - both statements are false. But this falsity does not change the fact that humans want to be gods and to create something that is better than humans are.

Arminus,

It is still not clear what you are suggesting. What do you eaxtly mean by life or living organism? What would be the difference between a human and an android according to you? Is inclusion of any pure mechanical device in the humans is enough call them andriods? Is a human having his knee joint replaced by an artificial one worthy enough to be called an android? Or, he should has something else?

With love,
Sanjay

I think it is quite clear what I mean by "life" and "living organism". And as I also said several times: androids belong to the machines, cyborgs belong to the humans. So if humans wanted to become machines, they could only become cyborgs; and if machines wanted to become humans, they could only become androids. So cyborgs are humans, although with some or many features, properties, characters of machines, and androids are machines, although with some or many features, properties, characters of humans.

Arminius wrote:Humans are biological beings with cells, and a cell is the smallest independently viable unit. Machines are not biological beings. Although the human organisms work similarly as machines work - so that we can speak of a similarity between the organismic "machine" and the technical machine -, each human organism is based on life (biology), whereas each machine is based on technique (technology). Human beings are living beings, machines are technical resp. artificial beings.

Machines do not have cells. A cell is the smallest independently viable unit. Machines are not living beings. Androids are machines. Cyborgs are humans. Humans are living beings. Living beings are not machines.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Orbie » Thu Apr 23, 2015 5:17 pm

Arminius,

Zinnat has a point, thou maybe we are overlooking it. development per evolution of organisms is very gradual over a long time. There are no gaps within the continuum. So the problem is, of defining at what point can we say of a lower order organism, that it has no function in decision making? At what point, for instance the actions of a fly eating plant, can it be said, that there is a certain amount of understanding in terms of deciding to open its mouth and swallow a fly? Between the machine and man, there also exist a long developmental continuum, and if only a few human devices/traits/organs are left within its body, when is it, that it can be said to have
become a machine?

In other words on the cellular level there is a noticeable distinction, but on the molecular level, no such distinction pervades. It's a structural and systemic arrangement .
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 6:25 pm

Arminius wrote:I think it is quite clear what I mean by "life" and "living organism". And as I also said several times: androids belong to the machines, cyborgs belong to the humans. So if humans wanted to become machines, they could only become cyborgs; and if machines wanted to become humans, they could only become androids. So cyborgs are humans, although with some or many features, properties, characters of machines, and androids are machines, although with some or many features, properties, characters of humans.


I apologize for not having read the whole thread. I honestly still do not understand what is the difference between a cyborg and an android. To me, they are the same entities. Would you explain that?

Arminius wrote:Machines do not have cells. A cell is the smallest independently viable unit. Machines are not living beings. Androids are machines. Cyborgs are humans. Humans are living beings. Living beings are not machines.


This is true that living things are made of cells. But, at the end of the day, even cells are made of same basic ingredients as of machines. If we break down any living entity, which we can do now precisely, they are made of same inorganic compounds like water, carbon, iron etc. Then, what is that make organisms Live?

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Arminius » Thu Apr 23, 2015 6:56 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
Arminius wrote:I think it is quite clear what I mean by "life" and "living organism". And as I also said several times: androids belong to the machines, cyborgs belong to the humans. So if humans wanted to become machines, they could only become cyborgs; and if machines wanted to become humans, they could only become androids. So cyborgs are humans, although with some or many features, properties, characters of machines, and androids are machines, although with some or many features, properties, characters of humans.

I apologize for not having read the whole thread. I honestly still do not understand what is the difference between a cyborg and an android. To me, they are the same entities. Would you explain that?

Yes.

Cyborgs are humans with features, properties, characters of machines; so they may be on the way from humans to machines, but they can't become machines. Androids are machines with features, properties, characters of humans; so they may be on the way from machines to humans, but they can't become humans. The difference betwen cyborgs and androids is life as it is defined by biology.

zinnat13 wrote:
Arminius wrote:Machines do not have cells. A cell is the smallest independently viable unit. Machines are not living beings. Androids are machines. Cyborgs are humans. Humans are living beings. Living beings are not machines.

This is true that living things are made of cells. But, at the end of the day, even cells are made of same basic ingredients as of machines.

Yes, but that is not what you asked. You asked me about the difference between cyborgs and androids. And here is my answere again: The difference betwen cyborgs and androids is life as it is defined by biology.

zinnat13 wrote:If we break down any living entity, which we can do now precisely, they are made of same inorganic compounds like water, carbon, iron etc..

Again: that is not what you asked. You asked me about the difference between cyborgs and androids. And here is my answere again: The difference betwen cyborgs and androids is life as it is defined by biology.

zinnat13 wrote:Then, what is that make organisms Live?

Do you know the biological definition of "life"?
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5732
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 7:29 pm

Orb wrote:Zinnat has a point


Yes, i certainly have, and very big one too. This very simple and common point can brought down the whole premise of AI singlehandedly and successfully too.

Orb wrote:thou maybe we are overlooking it.


That is certainly the case. Actually, it is so simple and common that we refuse to pay attention to it. Like Tixe said - it just happens thus forget it and move on to the bigger issues.

Orb, if an alien, from such a planet, where there were no plants, would ever come to the earth, i am dead sure that he would look into the plants first before animals/humans, for the simple reason that they are more challenging to deduct sentience wise.

It is understandable to some extent that animals/humans have sentience, because they have CNS and brain. But, what about plants which do not have any such things? What is creating their sentience?

Secondly, i find it even more surprising that we are trying to invent artificial humans before trying to invent artificial plants! if we cannot understand and replicate a live plant, how on the earth we could ever replicate live human ever, which is thousands time more complex than plants!

Is it not like trying to land on Mars before moon!

Science says that human dies when its brain stops working (even that is wrong and i can prove it scientifically right now even on the net). Right! But, what makes a plant die? They do not have any brain or even a heart! So, theoretically, should they not live forever?

Has anyone answers?

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 7:43 pm

Arminius wrote:Cyborgs are humans with features, properties, characters of machines; so they may be on the way from humans to machines, but they can't become machines. Androids are machines with features, properties, characters of humans; so they may be on the way from machines to humans, but they can't become humans. The difference betwen cyborgs and androids is life as it is defined by biology.


It is still hard me to understand except the distinction of life. But, i take it.

Arminius wrote:but that is not what you asked


True. i certainly not asked this specifically in that post but is the thread has not been around this issue all along?
Secondly, what if i ask those questions again now?

Arminius wrote:Do you know the biological definition of "life"?


I do not think if there is any clear-cut biological definition of life. Or, i am not aware of that till now. There are only vague interpretations.

with love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby GreatandWiseTrixie » Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:18 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
Orb wrote:Zinnat has a point


Yes, i certainly have, and very big one too. This very simple and common point can brought down the whole premise of AI singlehandedly and successfully too.

Orb wrote:thou maybe we are overlooking it.


That is certainly the case. Actually, it is so simple and common that we refuse to pay attention to it. Like Tixe said - it just happens thus forget it and move on to the bigger issues.

Orb, if an alien, from such a planet, where there were no plants, would ever come to the earth, i am dead sure that he would look into the plants first before animals/humans, for the simple reason that they are more challenging to deduct sentience wise.

It is understandable to some extent that animals/humans have sentience, because they have CNS and brain. But, what about plants which do not have any such things? What is creating their sentience?

Secondly, i find it even more surprising that we are trying to invent artificial humans before trying to invent artificial plants! if we cannot understand and replicate a live plant, how on the earth we could ever replicate live human ever, which is thousands time more complex than plants!

Is it not like trying to land on Mars before moon!

Science says that human dies when its brain stops working (even that is wrong and i can prove it scientifically right now even on the net). Right! But, what makes a plant die? They do not have any brain or even a heart! So, theoretically, should they not live forever?

Has anyone answers?

with love,
sanjay

plants do not have sentience. humans and animals do.
I am losing my mind to mandess.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2136
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:54 pm

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:plants do not have sentience. humans and animals do.


That is merely a statement rather than an argument.

I can say the same that plants also have sentience like humans and animals. But, can it serve any purpose or can convince anyone if i would not explain my reasoning behind that!

That is how what we are supposed to do in philosophy.

With love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby GreatandWiseTrixie » Thu Apr 23, 2015 8:55 pm

zinnat13 wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:plants do not have sentience. humans and animals do.


That is merely a statement rather than an argument.

I can say the same that plants also have sentience like humans and animals. But, can it serve any purpose or can convince anyone if i would not explain my reasoning behind that!

That is how what we are supposed to do in philosophy.

With love,
sanjay


it would have no mathematical basis. If plants have sentience, why not candy? There are moving chemicals inside of candy.
I am losing my mind to mandess.
User avatar
GreatandWiseTrixie
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2136
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2015 6:18 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby zinnat » Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:14 pm

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:
zinnat13 wrote:
GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:plants do not have sentience. humans and animals do.


That is merely a statement rather than an argument.

I can say the same that plants also have sentience like humans and animals. But, can it serve any purpose or can convince anyone if i would not explain my reasoning behind that!

That is how what we are supposed to do in philosophy.

With love,
sanjay


it would have no mathematical basis. If plants have sentience, why not candy? There are moving chemicals inside of candy.


My friend,

I am not competent enough to argue with you, about this issue at least. I apologise for my shortcoming. Please find a suitable match for yourself.

With love,
sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3650
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby James S Saint » Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:23 pm

Plants "make decisions" through auto-responses, much like a thermostat "decides" when to turn on the heater. There is no remote recognition involved, merely direct contact and response.

And a plant dies when it has systemic failure, no longer sustaining its nutrient cycle.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Will machines completely replace all human beings?

Postby Orbie » Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:11 pm

The analogy is very fitting, the plant as corresponding to the auto responses of a mechanical gadget, further points toward the view, that the plant, can be looked at as an evolutionary retrograde, most akin to machines. The composition of which have anomalous structural ingredients, where it(the plant) can be interpreted as more like a machine then a human being, judging from it's actions. Therefore, the fact that the reverse appears to be happening, the retrogression into more rather than less conversion from human-ness, seems to further the view, that life, is more of a factor of adaptation, then to genetic typing. In other words, the function of a thing or an organism, determines it, as a type of thing, signifying a chemical or biochemical constitution.
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users