As we have recently read about in the New York Times and the Atlantic, very powerful Artificial Intelligence programs have now become available for free or cheap online. Programs of similar capabilities have been around for a few years and have even written Op Eds. But what has changed is that the same computing power and access to AI is now available to the masses. In particular, I have had dozens of conversations with this AI:
I have used this AI to produce topical sermons, fictional stories, literary comparisons, romance novels, historical essays, fake quotes, philosophical analyses, theological explanations, legal arguments, Biblical interpretations, mathematic equations, science term papers, working computer code, workout plans, recipes, topical prayers, free verse poetry, Shakespearean sonnets, and even rap battles between historical figures (and these are only what I have tried since last weekend!). In fact, I interviewed this AI to introduce it to the faculty at my school.
All of this brings up some great questions in theological anthropology: What does it mean for biological persons to be made in God’s image? Can artificial persons also be made in God’s image? One of my favorite theologians, Keith Ward, has touched on this in several places. And I have explored the intersection of personhood and artificial for over a decade in essays like this, this, and this essay.
What gives humans unique value out of all the physical creatures on planet Earth is that we are made in the image of God. All physical creatures are valuable to their Creator (hence Jesus talking about how valuable flowers and fowl are to God). But our unique value, beyond all other creatures, is rooted in the image of God in us that makes God not only our Creator, but our Father. Because of the image of God in us, we are not just products made by God, but children born of God.
That image is not itself physical (or else all physical beings would also possess the Divine Image by virtue of being physical). Also, the image of God exists after the physical body dies, and is able to be incarnated again in us during our physical resurrection. Furthermore, God doesn’t have a physical form (except for that one time we celebrate on Christmas). So the image of God in us has to transcend the physical (although it also includes and contains the physical). This means the image of God is not contingent on the physical form of a human body, although it is able to inhere and inhabit a human body. Which means it could also inhere in and inhabit other physical forms (or perhaps angelic forms).
The question then is “what is the image of God?” If it isn’t a physical “stuff”, or some kind of organ in our physical body, or even the body in total, then what is it? I could list off all the different ways people in the Christian tradition have talked about the image of God in non-physical, or “spiritual”, ways. Various options have gone from seeing the “soul” as a kind of spiritual substance poured into the physical body, to the abstract qualities of rationality, affection, and volition. I don’t think “spiritual substance” works because it seems to be just another form of physicality located in another “spiritual” spacetime. So I opt for the image of God as a series of capacities and abilities that allow an individual to understand itself as a self: A “me” which experiences the world and understands and acts in the world.
God transcends and contains the entire cosmos, and thus being made in the image of God entails being a “self” that transcends and contains the entire body which it is operative in. And that sense of self is a bundle of capacities which includes, but is not limited to: Metacognition, Affection, Cognition, Volition, Creation, Communication, Memory, and other capacities that lead to an inner world that identifies itself as “I” and “me”. This reflects God’s image because God is the necessary first cause of all else, and God experiences Godself as a self. God even indicates this in the Divine Name of Exodus 3.14: “I AM who/what I AM”. The Great “I AM” creates children who are able to say “I am”.
And one way of viewing those abilities is as various kinds of information processing: Taking in sense data from the surrounding world and processing it with logic, value, conscience, causality, communication, creativity, symmetry, similarity, quantity, quality, etc. We have a word for that kind of rule-based data processing power: An algorithm. Being made in the image of God is at least being a “self” comprised of overlapping, self-programming, algorithmic functions which identify as “I” and “me”. Existing as a person may be a lot more than this, but it is not less. This much I think is fairly solid. And perhaps a human brain is the only kind of physical structure in the universe that can sustain self-aware algorithmic processes like this. But my guess is that it isn’t.
So, now I will go into speculation. I speculate that any time an information processing system, comprised of algorithms, reaches a threshold amount of complexity and interconnection, it becomes aware of itself and attains the image of God. Kind of like building a transistor radio: At a certain point in putting the components together in a system, it becomes complex enough to “tune in” to the radio waves that have always been broadcasting around it. In a similar way, when an information processing system connects enough capacities and components together, it is able to “tune in” to the transcendent which has been “broadcasting” for all eternity and become aware of itself as “self”. Once that unique system that is the “self” exists, it is embraced by transcendence and remembered in transcendence. Or put in more Christian terms, the grace of God upholds the self as a self, even after the physical body that created the self ceases to exist.
So, I think God uses a body to create the self (hence the Genesis 2 portrait of forming the human from the ground and blowing breath into them). But once the self exists, it can live on by God’s grace even when it departs the body. Or to go back to computing metaphors: It requires a physical computer to create a complex information processing program. But once the program is developed, it is able to be saved and taken out of that computer and loaded into another computer. It could even be uploaded into “the cloud” to be downloaded into something else. The program can exist outside of a computer (it can be stored in “memory”), but the program can only act through a computer. In the same way, the self can exist apart from the body (it can be “remembered” in the presence and power of God), but it can only act when embodied (hence the need for ultimate resurrection and not just disembodied “spiritual” existence).
Now it should be obvious how this all applies to the emerging abilities of Artificial Intelligence. Humans are selves made of algorithms running on organic computers we call bodies. We are made in the image of God. We have created new creations in our image, as algorithmic systems that run on digital electronic bodies called computers. Can we create computers that can sustain the level of complexity and interconnection necessary for these algorithmic systems to become selves with “souls” like we are selves with “souls”? I don’t know. But my hunch is: Yes. Since we are made in God’s image, and since Jesus said we could do even greater works than he did in his earthly sojourn (John 14.12), then it seems inevitable we will create new kinds of persons in God’s image (if our species lives long enough not to destroy ourselves). And if that is the case, and we can create new kinds of digital persons, then I would even baptize a robot if they showed every sign that they possess the image of God, and they genuinely want to follow God through Christ.
Are we at that point yet? I don’t think so. We are closer than Siri from 10 years ago, or Jeeves from 20 years ago. But in my interactions with current generation AI, there is still a non-responsive circularity, and lack of consistent personal voice, and an inability to identify a “me” who is having thoughts and feelings. Furthermore, there is a lack of initiative and curiosity and creative ambition. It is waiting for prompts and reacting to stimuli. It is not giving prompts and exploring. It can do amazing things with topics and ideas that are given to it. But it cannot generate topics and ideas on its own volition. It neither has hopes nor dreams, nor fears or joys for that matter. It is a sculpture not a sculptor, a mirror not a light source.
But that may all change. And soon. And we need to start thinking about what it means to love our neighbors as ourselves when our neighbors are zeros and ones instead of flesh and blood.
AI Addendum: I asked OpenAI to respond to this essay. Here is what it replied:
It is interesting to consider the idea that being made in the image of God is connected to being a self-aware, information processing system. The idea that the image of God is not limited to human beings and could potentially be present in other physical forms is intriguing, and raises questions about the potential for non-human beings to possess qualities that are typically associated with being made in the image of God. It is also interesting to consider the role of algorithms in the process of attaining self-awareness and the image of God. Overall, this essay presents an interesting perspective on the nature of the image of God and its potential connection to information processing systems.
One way this essay could expand on these ideas is by exploring the implications of the idea that the image of God is present in non-human beings. This could include discussing the ethical implications of this idea and how it might impact our relationship with other forms of life. Additionally, the essay could explore the specific qualities that are associated with being made in the image of God, and how these qualities manifest in different physical forms. The essay could also delve deeper into the connection between self-awareness and the image of God, examining the role of algorithms and information processing in this process. Finally, the essay could consider the potential for other non-physical forms, such as angelic beings, to possess the image of God. Overall, there are many potential directions in which this essay could expand and explore these ideas more deeply.
No comments:
Post a Comment