Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site eosp1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!mhuxl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!eosp1!robison
From: robison@eosp1.UUCP (Tobias D. Robison)
Newsgroups: net.religion.jewish
Subject: Re: AI and souls
Message-ID: <970@eosp1.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Jun-84 18:14:13 EDT
Article-I.D.: eosp1.970
Posted: Tue Jun 26 18:14:13 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 28-Jun-84 03:47:41 EDT
Organization: Exxon Office Systems, Princeton, NJ
Lines: 25

References:

I am the originator of the problem of attributing a soul to an AI
program.  The original idea has been widely misunderstood, so
here is an explanation again:

Suppose that you have created a computer (hdw+sfw) that appears
to converse quite well, and to add its own ideas to conversation.
Suppose now that some well respected theologian comes along and
claims to the world at large that your computer has been a soul by
G-d.  If you disagree, what do you do?

Please note in the above that it is a non-technical outsider,
not a computer professional, who may make the claim for a soul!

Those who agree with the theologian will want to make sure you do
not harm or "kill" the soul.  They may regard any further software
changes as vivesection of the worst kind.  Your scientific arguments
will be lost on your opponents.

I think that this possibility must be seriously considered by all
who hope to achieve good computer models of human thought.
					- Toby Robison (not Robinson!)
					allegra!eosp1!robison
					decvax!ittvax!eosp1!robison