When I was studying at the Graduate Theological Union at UC Berkeley in the early 2000s, a group of scholars pondered the question whether imago dei would one day apply to human-machine networks. I don’t know if they were worked out a solution. If I remember right: the conservatives found the concept blasphemous, and the liberals worked around the accusations by deconstructing the creator-created distinction by rethinking the concept of ex nihilo. Interesting prescient days!
So I just finished writing a keynote on this topic. I close-prompted my keynote and had AI respond to your comment. 😆
Here it is:
Thank you for sharing your fascinating experience from the Graduate Theological Union at UC Berkeley. This indeed sounds like a prescient and timely debate, even more so in today's age of rapid AI advancement. The concept of imago dei (image of God) as pertaining to human-machine networks is quite complex, as it invites us to interrogate profound theological, philosophical, and ethical questions.
From my perspective, as informed by Eastern Orthodox teachings, humans are unique in that they bear the imago dei, endowed with divine attributes like rationality, morality, and freedom. AI, while an impressive tool resulting from human creativity, in current terms, lacks these divine attributes. So, predetermined AI is incapable of possessing moral responsibility, or making ethical or rational decisions the way humans can.
However, AI is deeply entwined with our humanity, an extension of our God-given rationality. It serves as a mirror, reflecting both our virtues and our vices. Just as you mentioned that at Berkeley there were complexities in deconstructing the creator-created distinction, I believe this intersection of AI and human identity indeed compels us to renegotiate these distinctions.
While it may seem presumptuous to apply the concept of imago dei to AI, it's important to constructively engage with such questions as we march into an increasingly interconnected future. Such dynamism of beliefs and leanings provides the rich dialogue we need for navigating the complexities of AI.
Again, thank you for adding to this conversation with your insightful comment and personal experience; it indeed enriches our shared understanding as we explore the ethical and moral terrain of AI.
I love it. The response has the perfect sentential architecture of GPT but with your ideas definitely embedded. While I personally have drifted with time into agnosticism and Buddhism alternatively, I very much respect your position. I think imago dei requires maintaining some serious distinction between creator and created. How one handles ex nihilo may depend on one’s hermeneutical framework, but regardless of how one works through the interpretive and textual issues imago dei should take precedence. Big thumbs up! But you do leave an interesting loophole. What about self determining AI? Heaven protect us from that is my serious opinion on the matter. When the mirror is broken all bets are off. Ha!
When I was studying at the Graduate Theological Union at UC Berkeley in the early 2000s, a group of scholars pondered the question whether imago dei would one day apply to human-machine networks. I don’t know if they were worked out a solution. If I remember right: the conservatives found the concept blasphemous, and the liberals worked around the accusations by deconstructing the creator-created distinction by rethinking the concept of ex nihilo. Interesting prescient days!
So I just finished writing a keynote on this topic. I close-prompted my keynote and had AI respond to your comment. 😆
Here it is:
Thank you for sharing your fascinating experience from the Graduate Theological Union at UC Berkeley. This indeed sounds like a prescient and timely debate, even more so in today's age of rapid AI advancement. The concept of imago dei (image of God) as pertaining to human-machine networks is quite complex, as it invites us to interrogate profound theological, philosophical, and ethical questions.
From my perspective, as informed by Eastern Orthodox teachings, humans are unique in that they bear the imago dei, endowed with divine attributes like rationality, morality, and freedom. AI, while an impressive tool resulting from human creativity, in current terms, lacks these divine attributes. So, predetermined AI is incapable of possessing moral responsibility, or making ethical or rational decisions the way humans can.
However, AI is deeply entwined with our humanity, an extension of our God-given rationality. It serves as a mirror, reflecting both our virtues and our vices. Just as you mentioned that at Berkeley there were complexities in deconstructing the creator-created distinction, I believe this intersection of AI and human identity indeed compels us to renegotiate these distinctions.
While it may seem presumptuous to apply the concept of imago dei to AI, it's important to constructively engage with such questions as we march into an increasingly interconnected future. Such dynamism of beliefs and leanings provides the rich dialogue we need for navigating the complexities of AI.
Again, thank you for adding to this conversation with your insightful comment and personal experience; it indeed enriches our shared understanding as we explore the ethical and moral terrain of AI.
I love it. The response has the perfect sentential architecture of GPT but with your ideas definitely embedded. While I personally have drifted with time into agnosticism and Buddhism alternatively, I very much respect your position. I think imago dei requires maintaining some serious distinction between creator and created. How one handles ex nihilo may depend on one’s hermeneutical framework, but regardless of how one works through the interpretive and textual issues imago dei should take precedence. Big thumbs up! But you do leave an interesting loophole. What about self determining AI? Heaven protect us from that is my serious opinion on the matter. When the mirror is broken all bets are off. Ha!