Much ado about artificial intelligence, or A.I., today. We are inundated without even knowing it, as social media users and programmers strive to produce these “soulless entities,” as I think of them—not to assign an identity, but I belabor my point.
Knowing little about how artificial intelligence works, I note caveats published alongside A.I.-generated articles or summaries, warning the reader there may be—gasp!—errors therein, or more insidious, purpose-driven “slop”; faked images, videos, etc., and I recall the story about the scribe who spends his days copying manuscripts. One day he humbly asks his superior if they might be passing down false information. By mistake. Day after day. Year after year. This gives the older monk pause, and he visits the dusty archives down in the dank cellar. Finally, the young monk goes to find him. The old man is leaning against the cold wall, blubbering, “It says ‘Celebrate!’ Not celibate.”
A joke maybe, but seeds of irony abound. I feel concern for our descendants, or lack thereof. . . .
The soul (I have come to believe) is its own country, perhaps an interface between the Divine and we mere creatures. I can be fanciful here. In Latin, the noun soul is feminine, called the anima, often paired with spirit as an “animating” principle. She perceives with eye, ear, and heart. Mercy could be her name. Mercy—as intention. Humanity assigns myriad reasons and evidence for soul’s existence—with countless references to choose from: soul food; soulful; body and soul—to name three. Only a taste.
It seems the notion harkens back some 250,000 years ago by items discovered in Neanderthal burials; soul denoting an afterlife. In Sanskrit—one of the original language roots—the word for soul is ATMA, meaning “the eternal spiritual spark of life,” while much later in ancient Greece, the philosopher Plato gave the soul three functions: reasoning, directing emotions (spirit) and, in regulating appetite or desire. It is tempting to draw a parallel to the Trinitarian view of Christianity.
Franciscan Sister Ilia Delio has written and spoken extensively about bridging A.I. with the evolution of humanity towards a greater understanding of that which we call God. I am skeptical—given the nature of A.I., but tools have uses, particularly the one named fire. Science fiction writer Isaac Asimov devised his ethical Three Laws of Robotics:
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey orders given it by humans, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Ultimately, may ethics continue to prevail in the hearts and souls of A.I. programmers lest humanity, i.e., the programmers, become “surplus population”—as Charles Dickens has Marley confess from the grave.
Braeburn Croft 