No, I did not say I agree with your criteria, at all. Please do not assume that one bit.Gadianton wrote: ↑Sat May 14, 2022 3:39 pmI think you mean, "yes, I agree with your criteria, and per the criteria , a robot is not a human."Markk wrote:No, specifically I am saying a robot is not a human…let along a man or woman, which are adult human beings.
Turing Test -- how immersive is the simulation? AI is terrible so far. Likewise, trans surgeries aren't very persuasive in general. A very large number of people out there see physical trans as freakish. Even folks who are sympathetic have to ask themselves if they would have the same relations with trans as they would non-trans by this criteria. But there are two other criteria, and this criteria might take a back seat to those, for many people.
Provenance -- this is a vast category. For starters, a brilliant art critic can easily be fooled by a fake Van Gogh. In art, provenance is everything. Markk is all-in on provenance arguments. It doesn't matter how physically convincing trans ever becomes, where is the paperwork that shows the genetics, and everything about the history of the specimen? It's by provenance (brains being similar) that we consider that other people have internal worlds like our own. There is no way to prove somebody else has an inner life. There will never be a way to prove a robot or AI has (or doesn't have) an inner life. There are very good arguments against the Turing test as necessary and sufficient-- the Turing test is a behaviorist theory. It assumes there is no such thing as "inner life". Most people think it must walk like a duck, quack like a duck, and feel and think like a duck also. Computer hardware no matter how advanced for many if not most people is sufficiently different from a brain that we can't seriously entertain the thought of a robot being sentient. However, Markk probably doesn't object to a person's humanness on grounds of an artificial heart. What if, one day, parts of the brain can be replaced with prosthetics that have the same functional role? Or, what if neurons can be replaced with man made fabrications of different materials but holding the same functional role? Replace one neuron at a time with synthetic neurons until they are all replaced and is it still 100% obvious that the result isn't a human?
Changing sex at the genetic level goes way back. More recently:
an xx that is a male phenotype and with the gender traits such as those are, follow suit."Expression of the Y chromosomal gene Sry is required for male development in mammals and since its discovery in 1990 has been considered a one-piece gene," he said.
"Sry turns out to have a cryptic second part, which nobody suspected was there, that is essential for determining the sex of male mice. We have called the two-piece gene Sry-T."
The scientists tested their theory and found that male mice (XY) lacking in Sry-T developed as female, while female mice (XX) carrying a Sry-T transgene developed as male.
The success rate for the experiments was almost 100 per cent
Inner life -- There is no way to prove or disprove the contents of a person's reported inner life. If a person reports being female while having a body type that doesn't match, for some people that's enough to trump the other two categories and say the person is female or even a woman. Others will just deny that the person is truthful or even if truthful that it has any bearing. If an AI reports having an inner life with feelings, that wouldn't be enough to convince most people that it's sentient. I can write a bash script that says it's sentient.
Does Markk believe God is male? Does God have a body? How about Jesus casting demons into the swine? Did Jesus take care to cast only male demons into male swine? Do demons have gender? Do souls separate from the body at death, and do they have gender? Markk is extracting a lot from biological determinism; something really at odds with Christianity for the most part.
Your premise is skewed, therefore your analysis is skewed. First, AI are just that artificial, and a creation of what you want them to be inclusive with, they they will always be exclusive with its “creator.” They will always be artificial in that that is what they are…artificial. Saccharine may be sweet, but it will never be sugar, even if you decide to call it that.
in my opinion…What you are basically saying or trying to get at is that gender identity, in regards to ones sex, is a choice, both personally and/or by society as a whole. And that choice, whether biologically factual, determines the truth? Please correct this statement if i am wrong.
Which begs the question…”is a Homosexual a Homosexual because they choose to be Homosexual, or do they have no choice? Often I have seen arguments from heterosexuals that say homosexuality is a choice, and the homosexual counters with “did you choose to be heterosexual?” Which implies no, it was not a choice.
Secondly…Transgender-ism as a whole carries a huge spectrum of variables. Some who identify as transgender do so out of necessity and because of disease, or unexplainable mutations, syndromes, and chromosome disorders, which would include AIS and Klinefelters. These would most often be termed as intersex people, even though many are either biologically male or female, while others carry both chromosomes and sexual organs and choose to identify as neither a male or female but as something like a intersex person.
Then there are those that just choose to identify as such, and even be surgically altered based only on feelings, when biologically they are 100% biologically a male or a female with no chromosomal disorders or differing sexual organs.
In other words…there are way too many variables in your statement and as I wrote your premise is skewed out of the gate. And trying to apply Turning’s theory, from AI to a Human is a total spin of what Turning was asserting. And in my opinion opinion it is an insult to a human that is struggling with their identity to compare them Artificial intelligence and a philosophers test which began as a game.
But at any rate this is a interesting discussion…I will check in and out when i can and finish up with the other two. Off to San Diego for a long weekend and a day at Lego land.