Could Deep Blue play a smarter AI ?

[JerichoHill]

I asked, are good and evil concepts that are logically applicable if there is no such thing as free will, and all actions are already determined.

The answer I received was "No" (some posts up)

Therefore, because my head would hurt with a worldview in which free will didn't exist, I'm going to believe that free will exists. To me, its just more useful

 

[NapoléonPremier]

Well, photons are kind of funny. Saying that real photons don't have a rest mass can be a little misleading, since they are never at rest! Usually one thinks of the mass as the time component of the momentum four-vector, p = (E, p), where in the case of the photon E = |p|, which never is zero. And even if you don't think of it this way, this is the mass you experience.

Christ, now it sounds like physics class... Everytime I hear the word "vector" I draw my gun...

 

[5cats]

Origionally Poster by Jericohill: Therefore, because my head would hurt with a worldview in which free will didn't exist, I'm going to believe that free will exists. To me, its just more useful

Hooray!

 

[NapoléonPremier]

As for Jericho Hill's question, responsibility (which is all that is necessary for morality) is sometimes said not to require free will. This is a valid philosophical opinion about which all my information comes from reading the Stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy, to which someone posted a link earlier. He has misphrased the point, which was that it is still possible to believe in good and evil in the absence of free will. The most popular answer to his question is, it appears, 'no'.

I don't see how it could be otherwise. Except by playing on words. "Good" or "evil" suppose the existence of moral choices, which implies the existence of a choice at all. Otherwise, it is true that you still can place a judgement or evaluation of the effects of any system, but it should be phrased as "positive" or "negative" - "good" and "evil" being in this case an uncorrect use of the terms.

 

[JerichoHill]

Life would be rather pointless if I knew I really didn't have an ability to choose.

I think I'd get depressed...because then the only way I'd get to do two chicks at once at the same time is if it was already determined.

Bummer.

 

[kingjoshi]

Life would be rather pointless if I knew I really didn't have an ability to choose.

I think I'd get depressed...because then the only way I'd get to do two chicks at once at the same time is if it was already determined.

Bummer.

For some people, life without God implies a meaningless life. Morality without God implies no morality. Obviously, the agnostics/atheists the world over disagree. The same analogy applies regarding free will.

In the objective grand scene, no, our lives have no meaning. That doesn't lessen my joy of life or how I value it. It doesn't diminish the happiness from love and the sorrow when it's gone. We know and biologically and socially, people are somewhat programmed to care more for their families then any random stranger. Does that knowledge change how you feel about your families? Does it make you go, "Well, I don't love them anymore." Absurd.

Morality with and without God has different foundations. Take free will out, and obviously the foundations for what is "right" and "wrong" changes. A moral system with those foundations can still be built. And a judicial system based upon that moral system can be built.

 

[jar2574]

Of course this system would be possible. Any system is possible if a society decides it. But what would be the point ? It resembles very much the type of "justice" of primitive society, based mostly on the "an eye for an eye" principle. Don't you think it makes more sense that we punish more the premeditated killer than the accidental killer, even if to the victim the effect (death) is the same ? I fail to see your point about the virtues and benefits of such a system.

I stated clearly that I was "not advocating for a change to the current USA system." I never said anything about virtues or benefits of my hypo system, I just explained how it would work.

My hypo was only a response to another poster's comment that a legal system must depend on a belief in free will. A legal system could exist without belief in free will.

 

[Pawel]

Christ, now it sounds like physics class... Everytime I hear the word "vector" I draw my gun...

Oh, I am sorry about that!

 

[Turner]

Moderator Action: Thread closed, way off topic.