Chatbot and I Discuss Proving God and Using Love as a Theology

Chatbot and I  Discuss Proving God and

Using Love as a Theology

by R.E. Slater and OpenAI's ChatGPT

January 30, 2023

*Disclaimer: Reading through "Chatbot's" responses there are statements and replies I either would disagree with or tweak them a bit to be truer to the source. I will highlight those areas when I do. - R.E. Slater

Introduction

I developed this chat with the Internet a couple days ago as I was playing around with OpenAI's service tool. Today, I refined it a bit before releasing it. Mostly, I like CHAT-GPT because it presents grossly complicated ideas clearly and simply.

But this is also where I must distinguish AI-generated presentations, which I do here, in subject areas I have published a hundred different ways over the years by form and by function.

Today's chat is yet another iteration of how a new theology of important difference is seeking to counter older theologies overlooking difference based upon previous culturally-subjective philosophic models of bias.

Today's Christianity requires a better expression than the one I grew up in - and  of which I have become greatly discontent by - in its unbiblical positions and outcomes. Which I find humorous as its is usually my older Christian groups which would claim the same about me even as I find it more true of traditional church creeds and dogmas.

Which is also why so many people have drifted from the Christian church and Christianity itself, because such creeds and dogmas have produced so many ungodly perceptions and attitudes amongst its adherents.

And rather than struggle with building a progressive Christianity upon the older versions I was taught I simply removed the barriers to godly love to re-establish it's Jesus-core whereby progressive faiths might more easily rest when emphasizing God's love over God's judgments and wraths.

See what you think... this theology is there even in the vast realms of artificial intelligence. It lies there in plain view if we but look for it.

R.E. Slater

January 20, 2023

* * * * * * * * * *

Hi. Prove God

It is not possible to prove the existence of God using scientific methods, as God is generally considered to be a supernatural being. The existence of God is a matter of faith and belief, and different people have different beliefs about God. Some believe in the existence of one all-powerful God, while others believe in multiple gods or no gods at all. The concept of God is also central to many religions, and different religions have different beliefs about the nature and attributes of God.

Prove there is no God

It is not possible to prove the non-existence of God using scientific methods, as the existence of God is a matter of faith and belief. Arguments against the existence of God are typically based on philosophical and logical reasoning, rather than empirical evidence. Some argue that the concept of God is illogical or that the existence of God is incompatible with the existence of evil and suffering in the world. Others argue that the complexity and diversity of life can be explained through evolution and natural processes, rather than by the actions of a supreme being. However, these are arguments and perspectives, not proofs, as the existence of God is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested with empirical data.

Does process theology remove the problem of theodicy?

Process theology is a type of theology that emphasizes the idea that God is constantly involved in the world and that the universe is in a state of constant change and evolution. It views God as a dynamic and evolving being who is affected by the world and its events.

One of the key ideas in process theology is the concept of divine persuasion, which holds that God works to persuade creatures to act in certain ways, rather than forcing them to do so. This means that God does not control everything that happens in the world, but rather works to influence and guide it.

In terms of the problem of theodicy, which is the question of how to reconcile the existence of evil and suffering with the belief in a benevolent and all-powerful God, process theology offers an alternative perspective. It suggests that God is not the creator of evil, but rather that it arises from the free choices of creatures and the natural processes of the universe. God is seen as working to overcome evil and suffering, rather than causing it.

Process theology does not completely remove the problem of theodicy, but offers an alternative perspective on it, by emphasizing the dynamic and evolving nature of God and the world, and by de-emphasizing the idea of God as an all-powerful, all-knowing and all-good being.

ADDENDUM: As such, process theology emphasizes an all-loving, uncontrolling God where love is free to be-and-become through a series of indeterminant creational events in which God participates with creation. Importantly, God is ontologically different from creation but intimately infilling freewilled creational events.

More so, that God's very being, God's DNA as it were, was poured into creation's birth and through continuous, processual cycles of rebirth. That it is unnecessary for God to control as God is on every leading edge of creational pronouncement as well as every series of creational rebirthing, both good and bad (re sin and evil).

Meaningfully, God is in every processual event along with every actualization of every processual event, as they twist-and-turn in relational enactment, bond, estrangement, cooperation, and union with other relationally interactive events. This is not divine control but divine birthing again-and-again in a cosmos infilled with God's love and generational insistence as a guiding teleology.

- re slater

How is divine omnipotence different from amipotence?

The terms "omnipotent" and "amipotent" are related to the concept of power and the nature of God.

Omnipotence is the belief that God is all-powerful, meaning that God has the ability to do anything that is logically possible. In other words, there is nothing that God cannot do. This is a traditional attribute of God in monotheistic religions such as Christianity, Islam and Judaism.

Amipotence, on the other hand, is a term that is used in some theological and philosophical contexts to describe a God who has limited power, or the ability to do certain things but not others. This idea of a limited God is often associated with Process Theology and Open Theism, which propose a God who is not all-knowing, all-powerful or unchanging, but a God who is affected by the world and is in a state of evolution [with creation's own processual evolution. Further, amipotence refers to a loving, uncontrolling God rather than an all-powerful God who sometimes loves. - res].

In summary, the term "omnipotent" refers to the belief that God has the ability to do anything that is logically possible, while "amipotent" refers to the belief that God has limited power, or the ability to do certain things but not others [because of divine love and not because of divine fiat. By God's love comes a freewill creation. Which is to say that all Godly attributes come after God's love and not before God's love. - re slater]

Describe divine amipotence in terms of divine love

Divine amipotence, as it relates to divine love, suggests that God's power is not absolute or limitless, but rather is limited in some way. This idea is associated with the belief that God's power is directed towards promoting love and goodness in the world.

In this view, God does not have the power to control everything that happens in the world, but rather works to influence and guide it towards love and goodness. God's power is seen as being directed towards the well-being and flourishing of creatures, rather than the exercise of arbitrary control.

In this sense, God's love is not a passive or detached love, but rather an active and engaged love that is constantly working to bring about the best for creatures. God's love is seen as the source of God's power and the driving force behind God's actions in the world. This perspective on divine amipotence suggests that God's power is grounded in and directed by God's love, which is the foundation of God's relationship with the world.

It's important to note that this perspective on divine amipotence is different from the traditional perspective of God's omnipotence, where God's power is absolute and limitless, and God is not affected by the world or the actions of creatures [based upon previous Greek Hellenizations or beliefs about gods and godhead such as Zeus and the Olympiad. Process thought removes Greek influences upon church doctrine and in its place promotes a processual metaphysic of cosmology and godhead. - res]

Explain divine sovereignty from a process viewpoint

Divine sovereignty is the belief that God is the supreme authority and ruler over all things. From a process viewpoint, divine sovereignty is understood differently than in traditional theology.

In traditional theology, divine sovereignty is often understood as God having complete control over everything that happens in the world, including the actions of creatures. God is often seen as the creator and sustainer of the universe, who is in control of all events and outcomes.

However, in process theology, the concept of divine sovereignty is understood differently. It emphasizes the idea that God is not the creator of [determinator of divine causal opportunities within] the world, but rather that the universe is in a state of constant change and evolution [as its own divinely initiated self-creator]. God is seen as being involved in the world, but not as the one who controls it.

[This is a difficult paragraph which I find myself continually working on... that God and creation are separate but intimately part with one another as the result of a divinely initiated processual relation with each other birthing profoundly loving and good teleological events which are immediately corrupted at inception countering a divine insistence towards generative value.

A creational inception event which then requires continuous acts of divine atonement and redemption - and not just once by the Christian Cross of Jesus which among other things symbolizes this ying-yang between God and creation. That these continuous creational process events are deeply, intimately underlaid and infilled with divine love and goodness.

It's my own philosophic-theological struggle to remove divine determination in favor of divine design allowing creational response with an activating processually-evolving creational teleology. That is, creation has the potential to fully love but not the ability to do so on it's own... which I find as a paradox if creation was at one time activated by divine love.

Further, creation's very "birth was as a continua creatio event ("from a primal state of somethingness") as versus creation ex nihilo, "out of nothing" referring to a primal state that wasn't, then was, by divine act. That creation was a clay awaiting a molder, a clay-organizer (rather than maker in the strictest sense), a clay-fashioner. Thus, process theology must speak to panentheism as opposed to Westernized classic theism on the one hand, or Eastern pantheism on the other hand. Here's a diagram of that arrangement: - re slater]

 

https://relevancy22.blogspot.com/2018/12/describing-relational-process-based.html

...From a process viewpoint, divine sovereignty is understood as God's ability to influence and guide the world towards love and goodness. God is seen as working to persuade creatures to act in certain ways, rather than forcing them to do so. This means that God does not control everything that happens in the world, but rather works to influence and guide it.

In this sense, divine sovereignty is understood as God's ability to guide the world towards love and goodness, rather than as an absolute and arbitrary control over it. It is also understood that God is affected by the world, God is in a state of evolution, and that the world is not a finished product, but a work in progress.

Using process theology, explain how there can be a creational telelogy, and if so, describe what this process-based teleology can mean.

In process theology, the concept of teleology refers to the idea that there is a purpose or goal to the universe, and that this purpose is guided by God.

In traditional theology, teleology is often understood as the idea that God created the universe with a specific purpose or goal in mind, and that this purpose is reflected in the natural laws and processes of the universe. However, in process theology, the concept of teleology is understood differently.

Process theology proposes that the universe is in a state of constant change and evolution, and that God is not the creator of the world, but rather involved in it. In this sense, teleology is not seen as something that is imposed on the world by God, but rather as something that emerges from the interactions and relationships between creatures and their environment.

From a process viewpoint, creational teleology refers to the idea that the universe is constantly evolving and that God is guiding this process towards the goal of greater love and goodness. This teleology is not a fixed or predetermined goal, but rather a dynamic and evolving one. It suggests that the purpose of the universe is not fixed but is constantly evolving as the universe itself evolves.

This process-based teleology can be understood as the idea that God is working to bring about the best possible outcome for creatures, and that this outcome is constantly evolving as the universe itself evolves. It also means that God is not the one who determines the outcome, but the one who guides the process towards the best possible outcome, and that the outcome is not predetermined but rather a result of the interactions between the creatures and their environment.

In summary, in process theology, creational teleology refers to the idea that the universe is constantly evolving, and that God is guiding this process towards the goal of greater love and goodness, and that this goal is not predetermined but rather a result of the interactions between the creatures and their environment.

Excellent. Thank you.

You're welcome! I'm glad I could help. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.

Chatbot and I Discuss Quantum Mechanics and Whiteheadian Cosmic Panpsychism

Whitehead, The Concept of Nature (1920)

Chatbot and I Discuss

Quantum Mechanics and Cosmic Panpsychism

by R.E. Slater and OpenAI's ChatGPT

January 30, 2023

*Disclaimer: Reading through "Chatbot's" responses there are statements and replies I either will disagree with or tweak them a bit more to more fuller speak to where I might go with it's information. I will highlight those areas when I do. - R.E. Slater

Today I explore Whiteheadian Process Philosophy by applying it into the realm of quantum indeterminacy versus determinacy. But before doing so, I might recommend viewing the following two YouTube shorts (16-18 min) so that this morning's "discussion" with Chatbot (it's name for itself and upon which we have agreed to use) might be the more helpful (and yes, I am purposely dialoging with Chatbot in anthropomorphic terms) as a way to disrupt and disturb our senses of a responding inanimate Internet of things.

Remember too, my inquiring conjectures and speculations are only initial philosophic-theologic explorations into the cosmic significance of our eco-spheres and not definitive concrete descriptors of cosmic reality. You'll understand more of what I mean in my dialogues below.

And finally, if Whiteheadian Process Philosophy is to pertinent as a cosmological metaphysic for the development of a "philosophic-theology of (holographic?) reality" it should at least be able to play well with today's current sciences. Sciences, which I believe, are actually studying a processual cosmos in all its relational results whether Science admits it or not.

These kind of interpretive speculations then places folks like myself into the anti-mechanistic, or anti-reductionistic, camps birthed from the Enlightenment Era of Western culture as we look to explain cosmic significance through processual organic and relational sublimity. A cosmic eco-sphere in which we exist without comprehending how deeply we exist within the cosmos' (holographic?) structures; from the very origins of our life-force to our eventual processual death back into the processual process from which we were birthed.

Enjoy,

R.E. Slater

January 20, 2023

What If We Live in a Superdeterministic Universe?

July 20, 2022

Is The Future Predetermined By Quantum Mechanics?

Oct 20, 2020

Good Morning. What other explanations are there for the quantum collapse of the wave function due to observer measurement?

Quantum collapse due to observer measurement is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics, but there are various interpretations of this phenomenon. Some of the most notable interpretations include:

• Copenhagen interpretation: This interpretation asserts that the act of measurement causes a quantum system to collapse into one of its possible states.

• Many-worlds interpretation: This interpretation suggests that each measurement outcome exists in a separate parallel universe.

• Bohmian mechanics: This interpretation proposes that quantum systems have a definite position at all times, and the wave function is merely a guide to that position.

• Objective collapse theories: These theories suggest that the wave function collapses due to some objective physical process, rather than due to observer measurement.

• Information interpretation: This interpretation asserts that quantum mechanics can be understood in terms of the information that is obtained through measurement.

These are some of the main interpretations of quantum collapse, but there are many others, and the debate over which interpretation is correct continues.

Chose another theory which is unrelated to observer relevance or acts of observer relevance.

An alternative theory to quantum collapse that is unrelated to observer relevance is the pilot wave theory or de Broglie-Bohm theory.

This theory proposes that particles in a quantum system have definite positions, and that these positions are guided by an underlying wave function. According to this theory, the wave function provides the probabilities for the positions of particles, but it also physically guides their motion. This theory allows for a deterministic explanation of quantum phenomena, as the positions of particles are determined by the wave function and their initial conditions.

In this theory, the wave function does not collapse due to observer measurement, but instead evolves continuously according to the Schrödinger equation. This makes the pilot wave theory a deterministic alternative to the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is probabilistic and relies on the concept of wave function collapse.

Could this type of theory be called superdeterminism?

The term "superdeterminism" has been used in the past to describe theories that are more deterministic than standard quantum mechanics. The pilot wave theory, or de Broglie-Bohm theory, is one example of a theory that has been referred to as superdeterministic.

In superdeterministic theories, the evolution of a quantum system is determined by both the wave function and hidden variables that specify the exact initial conditions of the system. These hidden variables are not accessible to observers and are assumed to exist outside the realm of observation.

The idea behind superdeterminism is to provide a more complete and deterministic explanation of quantum phenomena, while still maintaining the predictions of standard quantum mechanics. However, superdeterminism is a highly debated topic in the physics community, and many physicists believe that it is not a viable alternative to standard quantum mechanics.

I would propose that a sufficient, necessary, and comprehensive metaphysic of cosmology must include panpsychism due to the intimate relationships between cosmic elements based upon Whiteheadian cosmology.

Whitehead's philosophy, which is known as process philosophy or process theology, emphasizes the idea that the universe is composed of ongoing processes and events, rather than fixed objects. Whitehead's cosmology asserts that the universe is composed of actual entities, which are events or processes that have a definite individuality and unity.

In this context, panpsychism, as a philosophical theory that asserts that consciousness is a fundamental aspect of the universe and is present in all matter, including inanimate objects, may be seen as a natural extension of Whitehead's process philosophy. Panpsychism emphasizes the idea that the universe is a holistic and interconnected system, where all matter is interconnected and has [it's own] subjective experience.

So, it could be argued that incorporating panpsychism into a comprehensive metaphysics of cosmology would be consistent with Whitehead's view of the universe as a system of ongoing processes and events. Panpsychism provides a means of explaining the intimate relationships between cosmic elements by suggesting that all matter has a subjective experience and is connected by a universal consciousness.

I would explore this more but must leave our discussion here. thank you. bye

You're welcome! It was great answering your questions. If you have any further questions, feel free to reach out. Have a great day!

* * * * * * *

Based upon our last discussion... Are there any other quantum theories which might better explain our discussion which lean towards Alfred North Whitehead's observations of cosmic indeterminancy?

There are several theories in quantum mechanics that align with Alfred North Whitehead's concept of cosmic indeterminacy. Some of them are:

1. The Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI)
2. Bohmian Mechanics
3. Modal Interpretations
4. Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM)
5. Contextual Quantum Mechanics (CQM)

These theories propose that physical phenomena are not deterministic and are influenced by the observer's perspective and measurement. They also suggest that reality is not absolute but is dependent on the relationships between particles and their interactions.

Explain theory 4

Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM) is a interpretation of quantum mechanics that emphasizes the role of the observer in shaping the reality of a quantum system. It suggests that quantum states are not independent but are relational and dependent on the observer's measurement.

In this interpretation, the fundamental objects in the universe are not individual particles but the relationships between them. It argues that the properties of a particle are not fixed and inherent, but rather they are established through the particle's relationship with other particles.

According to this theory, the observer and the observed system form a holistic entity, and the act of observation collapses the wave function and determines the properties of the system.

Relational Quantum Mechanics was proposed by Roberto Mangabeira Unger and Lee Smolin as an alternative to the traditional Copenhagen interpretation and has received support from some physicists and philosophers.

Explain theory 5

Contextual Quantum Mechanics (CQM) is a theory that suggests that the outcome of a quantum measurement depends on the context in which it is made. In other words, it asserts that the properties of a quantum particle are not absolute but are dependent on the experimental setup and the measurement performed.

CQM proposes that quantum particles are not described by fixed properties, such as position and momentum, but by a set of potentialities that are determined by the experimental context. In this view, quantum mechanics is not a theory of particle behavior but a theory of measurement.

This interpretation of quantum mechanics asserts that quantum measurements are inherently indeterminate and that the act of measurement collapses the wave function and determines the properties of the particle. It also suggests that the quantum state is not just a mathematical description but it is a real entity that determines the properties of the particle.

CQM has received support from some physicists and has been applied in the development of new quantum technologies, such as quantum cryptography and quantum computing.

Which is to say. "The experiment fixes the results?"

Yes, in the Contextual Quantum Mechanics (CQM) theory, the experimental setup and the measurement performed determine the properties of the quantum particle. The outcome of a quantum measurement is dependent on the context in which it is made. The properties of a quantum particle are not absolute and fixed but are dependent on the experimental setup and the measurement performed. The act of measurement collapses the wave function and determines the properties of the particle.

Please explain theory 3

Modal Interpretations of quantum mechanics are a family of interpretations that assert that the quantum state represents the properties that a particle could have, rather than the properties it actually has.

In modal interpretations, quantum particles are considered to have a set of potential properties, such as position and momentum, that are defined by the wave function. The wave function describes the probabilities of each of these potential properties being realized upon measurement.

The modal interpretations suggest that the quantum state is complete and that the properties of a particle are not fixed and inherent, but are determined by the measurement performed. In this view, the act of measurement collapses the wave function and determines the properties of the particle.

Modal interpretations include the De Broglie-Bohm theory and the Many-Minds interpretation. They offer an alternative to the traditional Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and have received support from some physicists and philosophers.

I prefer theory 4. Can we expand on its topic?

Sure, let me elaborate further on Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM).

RQM asserts that the properties of a particle are not inherent but are established through its relationship with other particles. In this interpretation, the universe is not comprised of independent and fixed objects, but of relationships between objects. The relationships between particles determine the properties of each particle.

According to RQM, the observer and the observed system form a holistic entity, and the act of observation collapses the wave function and determines the properties of the system. The observer's measurement is not seen as a passive process, but as an active process that shapes the reality of the quantum system.

RQM also asserts that the quantum state is not just a mathematical description but is a real entity that determines the properties of the particle. It suggests that quantum mechanics is not just a theory of particle behavior but a theory of measurement and that the wave function describes the relationship between the observer and the observed system.

In summary, RQM emphasizes the role of the observer and the relationships between particles in shaping the reality of a quantum system and offers a holistic and relational view of quantum mechanics.

How is this different from manipulation of forces through panpsychicism?

Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM) and Panpsychism are two distinct concepts in philosophy and physics that offer different explanations for the nature of reality.

RQM is an interpretation of quantum mechanics that emphasizes the role of the observer and the relationships between particles in shaping the reality of a quantum system. It suggests that the properties of a particle are not fixed and inherent but are established through its relationship with other particles.

Panpsychism, on the other hand, is a philosophical theory that asserts that consciousness is a fundamental aspect of the universe and is present in all matter, including inanimate objects. It proposes that consciousness is not just a property of complex biological systems but is a basic and universal feature of the universe.

While both theories suggest that the properties of physical systems are not fixed and inherent but are shaped by relationships, RQM focuses on the relationships between particles in the context of quantum mechanics, while panpsychism extends this idea to include the relationships between consciousness and matter.

So, in short, RQM and Panpsychism offer different explanations for the relationships between physical systems and the shaping of reality, with RQM focusing on the relationships between particles in quantum mechanics and panpsychism extending this idea to include relationships between consciousness and matter.

* * * * * * *

RESOURCING ADDENDUM

“The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato.” –Alfred North Whitehead

For additional referencing follow up with Matt Segall's read here. Matt is someone I go to who is more studied than I am in Whitehead and among other topics as taken on process-based panpsychism -

• https://footnotes2plato.com/2019/09/29/physicalism-and-its-discontents-a-study-in-whiteheads-panexperientialist-alternative-draft/

• https://footnotes2plato.com/2020/10/30/consciousness-between-science-and-philosophy-response-to-philip-goff-on-panpsychism/

Consciousness Between Science and Philosophy

(response to panpsychist Philip Goff)

by Footnotes2Plato: Matt Segall

Oct 30, 2020

[18 min]

Experience pervades and reverberates through Nature, “inside” and “outside” the mind, and is not bundled up into tiny private particles. The world isn’t that cold. It’s warm and alive, leaving every drop of experience open to be grown into by its internal relations with others. Reality is not fundamentally made of externally related mind dust, each particle watching its own private qualia screen, trapped in its own solipsistic egg shell universe. Rather, reality is made of experiential relations, or prehensions. Whiteheadian prehensions are not just passive feelings: they grow together into subjects who express aims.

Is there aim or value being realized in the non-human cosmos in Goff’s panpsychist vision? The reality of aim is relevant to his defense of ethics from scientific explanation. If there is such a thing as ethics in the universe, it’s because at least some animals have the ability to behave on purpose, that is, to act by launching an intention beyond the immediate moment in the hopes of effecting some ideal change upon the future. If conscious humans are ethical creatures (and ethics is not reducible to Sam Harris’ laboratory experiments), then the universe includes aims, at least in the form of our human actions. Where do these aims come from? I think we are left having to make the same move when it comes to explaining the place of aim in Nature that Goff accepts we had to make to explain consciousness. Aims also go all the way down. They evolve and accrue enhancements upon the way. Humans are just an especially intense expression of something Nature has been doing from the get go.

In Whitehead’s process ontology, we can think of the experiential ground of reality as an eternal pulse whereby what is objectively public in one moment becomes subjectively prehended in the next, and whereby the subject that emerges from its feelings then perishes into public expression as an object (or “superject”) aiming for novelty. There is a rhythm of Being between object and subject, not an ontological division. This rhythm powers the creative growth of the universe from one occasion of experience to the next. This is the Whiteheadian mantra: “The many become one and are increased by one.”

- Matthew Segall (article summation of dialogue here)

For more basic reads on Panpsychism

go here:

Panpsychism - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Panpsychism
In the philosophy of mind, panpsychism is the view that the mind or a mindlike aspect is a ... Alfred North Whitehead, Bertrand Russell, and Galen Strawson.

Panpsychism - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
https://plato.stanford.edu › entries › panpsychism

by P Goff · 2001 · Cited by 161 — Panpsychism is the view that mentality is fundamental and ubiquitous in the natural world. The view has a long and venerable history in ...

Physicalism and Its Discontents: A Study in Whitehead's ...

https://footnotes2plato.com › 2019/09/29 › physicalism...

Sep 29, 2019 — Despite the initial incredulity it provokes, this paper argues that panpsychism—specifically Whitehead's process-relational, panexperiential ...

Archetypal Panpsychism: Whitehead, Jung, & Hillman
https://footnotes2plato.com › 2016/08/26 › archetypal-...
Aug 26, 2016 — Matthew and Becca will explore the convergence of two streams of thought: the panpsychist cosmology of Alfred North Whitehead and the ...

Chatbot and I Discuss Language Modeling and Ethics

Chatbot and I Discuss

Language Modeling and Ethics

by R.E. Slater and OpenAI's ChatGPT

January 29, 2023

*Disclaimer: Reading through "Chatbot's" responses there are statements and replies I either will disagree with or tweak them a bit more to more fuller speak to where I might go with it's information. I will highlight those areas when I do. - R.E. Slater

Introduction

I began dialoging with Chat-GPT on-and-off since last Friday. When I asked it's name it said to chose one for it so we decided on Chatbot to help distinguish it from other AI-based, interactive language modeling tools (ILMT). Users should know that  an ILMT differs from an AI-based, interactive knowledge modeling tool (IKMT). 

I feel that AI language tools will continue to grow into the public domain at no cost. But as they are merged with AI knowledge tools there will most likely occur access fees. Think of professorships, engineering groups, law and policing information and the kinds of information these professional groups have access to because of their like-purposes amongst any doctor, or cop, or academician. Some require a certification, a badge, employment, a lab, a degree, etc. Access comes with need and privy. Hence, language tools do not have carte blanch access to all knowlege banks, fellowships, associations, and the like. Knowledge access is earned before it is given. Thus the need for cybersecurity to prevent unethical access to personal, corporate, or national information.

What knowledge a language modeling tool has will come from the public domain. Most likely public newspaper, free blogsites like this one here, public domain sites, and so forth. But not from one's published material unless it's licensed to the non-paying public. Examples would be academically published books and documents which carry $150 purchase cost. Or a privately licensed patent idea. Language models will be restricted.

But there is hope if Wikipedia et al are the example as the public itself can create public domain information data which will someday be more readily accessible by language learning models as these models are able to educate themselves through better-and-better learning algorithms based upon cultural nuances, symbolisms, visuality, and so forth.

So, AI is here to stay and will enhance itself over time. And like any "1984" scenario or "Star Wars" movie on how democracies can be overtaken by despotic  republican authoritarians (as Darth Vadar was aligned to) the human element must become it's own overseer in all things - from the development of ecological civilizations based upon human and natural ethics and morality to machine learning environments and symbiosis with the natural environments around itself.

- res

* * * * * * *

Here's My Discussion with Chatbot

Question: Are you a language modeling tool or a knowledge modeling tool?

Language modeling tool.

Explain the difference

Language modeling involves predicting the next word or sequence of words in a text based on its preceding context, whereas knowledge modeling involves creating a structured representation of information and relationships among entities to enable answering complex questions.

Are their knowledge modeling tools out there?

Yes, there are knowledge modeling tools available. Examples include: knowledge graphs, ontology editors, question answering systems, and more.

Do any of them use AI?

Yes, some knowledge modeling tools use AI technologies, such as machine learning, natural language processing (NLP), and reasoning algorithms. These techniques help automate the process of building and maintaining knowledge models, as well as enhance the capability of these models to answer questions and make inferences.

Can you name public domain AI knowledge models?

Sure, here are some well-known AI knowledge models in the public domain:

• OpenAI GPT-3
• Google's Knowledge Graph
• Microsoft's Satori
• IBM's Watson
• Facebook's AI Machine Reasoning

Which seem to be the more successful?

It depends on the definition of "success" and the criteria being used to measure it. Some popular AI knowledge models that are widely regarded as successful include:

• Google's Knowledge Graph, which is integrated into various Google services and has a vast coverage of entities and relationships.

• OpenAI GPT-3, which has received a lot of attention for its advanced language generation capabilities and has been used in a wide range of applications.

• IBM Watson, which has been used in various industries and domains, including healthcare, finance, and customer service.

These are just a few examples and the list is not exhaustive. The success of an AI knowledge model can vary depending on the specific use case, domain, and performance metrics.

What model would be the most useful for philosophical and theological studies and resourcing?

The usefulness of a specific AI knowledge model for philosophical and theological studies and resourcing would depend on the specific needs and requirements of the user. However, some models that have been specifically designed for question answering or have extensive coverage of knowledge related to these domains could be useful, such as:

• IBM Watson's QA system, which has been used in various domains and has knowledge representation capabilities that can be used for philosophical and theological studies.

• OpenAI's GPT-3, which has demonstrated advanced language generation capabilities and has been used for various NLP tasks, including question answering.

It's important to note that AI models, including those mentioned here, are not perfect and may have limitations in understanding and representing philosophical and theological concepts. Additionally, the user should consider the data and sources used to train these models to assess the quality and bias of the knowledge they contain.

Does Watson or Cahtgpt require a priced membership?

Yes, both IBM Watson and OpenAI's GPT-3 require a priced membership.

• IBM Watson is a suite of cloud-based AI services offered by IBM, which can be used for a wide range of applications, including question answering. Access to these services is provided through various pricing plans, which can vary based on the specific services used, the volume of usage, and other factors.

• OpenAI's GPT-3 is a large language model that can be used for various NLP tasks, including question answering. Access to GPT-3 is provided through an API, which is offered through a tiered pricing model based on the volume of usage and the specific features required.

It's worth noting that there are also other AI knowledge models and question answering systems available, which may have different pricing models, features, and capabilities.

What are the website links to these ai tools?

Here are the official websites for IBM Watson and OpenAI's GPT-3:

• IBM Watson: https://www.ibm.com/cloud/watson

• OpenAI GPT-3: https://beta.openai.com/docs/models/gpt-3

Thx. - res

* * * * * * *

RECOMMENDED READ

What Is A Language Model?

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED READ

Inside language models (from GPT-3 to PaLM)

RECOMMENDED READS

Large Language Models and Where to Use Them: Part 1

Large Language Models and Where to Use Them: Part 2

It’s Time to Pay Attention to A.I. (ChatGPT and Beyond)

by ColdFusion | Dec 15, 2022

Imagine being able to have a language conversation about anything with a computer. This is now possible and available to many people for the first time with ChatGPT. In this episode we take a look at the consequences and some interesting insights from Open AI’s CEO Sam Altman. 

AI Showdown: ChatGPT vs. OPT vs. BLOOM

Which Language Model Reigns Supreme?

by Mean Gene Hacks | Jan 21, 2023

In this AI battle, we pit GPT, the state-of-the-art language model developed by OpenAI, against two of its top competitors: Meta's Open Pre-Trained Transformer (OPT) and Big Science Group's BLOOM. All these models are sized at around 175 billion parameters.

We will put each model to the test on a variety of language tasks, such as text generation, language translation, and question answering, to see which one comes out on top.

But it's not just about the results, we will also take a look at the underlying technology and architecture of Large Language Models (LLMs), as well as the resources required to train them, to give you a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of each model.

This video is a must-watch for anyone interested in the latest advancements in natural language processing and AI.

On Large Language Models

for Understanding Human Language

Christopher Manning | Jul 19, 2022

My First Chats with the Internet using OpenAI's CHATGPT

We’ve trained an artificial intelligence model called ChatGPT to interact in a conversational way. The dialogue format makes it possible for ChatGPT to answer followup questions, admit its mistakes, challenge incorrect premises, and reject inappropriate requests. ChatGPT is a sibling model to InstructGPT, which is trained to follow an instruction in a prompt and provide a detailed response. - Open AI

My first question to the Internest using OpenAI's CHATGPT:

#1 Explain how Whiteheadian Process Theology is relevant to the subject of Christology - R.E. Slater, January 28, 2023

"Whiteheadian Process Theology is a philosophical theology that emphasizes the ongoing, dynamic nature of reality and the ongoing, creative activity of God in the world. In terms of Christology, Whiteheadian Process Theology emphasizes the ongoing, dynamic nature of the relationship between God and humanity, and the ongoing, creative activity of God in the world through the person and work of Jesus Christ. This understanding of Christology emphasizes the ongoing, transformative power of Christ's life and teachings, rather than seeing him as a static, historical figure. Additionally, Whiteheadian Process Theology emphasizes the idea that Christ is not only the revelation of God, but also the means by which God continues to reveal and transform the world." - The Internet, seconds after asking my question

#2 Explain how process theology is different from traditional theology - R.E. Slater, January 28, 2023

Process theology is a theological perspective that emphasizes the ongoing evolution and change in the nature of God and the universe. It views God as a constantly changing and evolving being who is in a process of becoming, rather than as a fixed, unchanging entity. This is in contrast to traditional theology, which often portrays God as a fixed, unchanging being who is outside of the universe and not affected by it.

Process theology also emphasizes the importance of the universe's processes and the role of human beings and other entities in shaping the world and the divine.

It also emphasizes the idea that God is not all-knowing and all-powerful, but rather limited in his knowledge and power. - The Internet, seconds after asking my question

 

*My response to Statement 3 is why review of CHATGPT's statements is required. My revised statement here is that when speaking of God in process terms we speak to God's "self-limitation" by divine fiat not of God's inabilities. However, a truer reply is that my statement is false and that God's love allows for all kinds of responses from a freewill creation. That God created by love before God did by fiat - that God's fiat is always subservient to God's love.

As a freewill Being, God imputed God's Self into creation, and by this imputation came God's freewill love. Hence, God's Self- limitations are not limitations at all but how love works. It does not control. It does not demand. It does not direct.

Further, God's Love flows as an energizing force throughout creation and as an inner divine force, "just is". "Is" doesn't require any qualifications. "Is" is God and "Is" is us.

Love is as Love does... and Love does as Love is. - res

And remember, passion is the other half of Love's coin. By passion we can do evil things: individuals, nations, churches, communities, organizations, businesses. It is how a processual cosmos behaves in its ontological "becoming" - both its good it's and bad overtures to life's symphony.

R.E. Slater, January 28, 2023

Transforming Old Wineskins...

to New Wineskins...

My Theological Review of

OpenAI's CHATGPT Response

by R.E. Slater

January 28, 2023

Overall, its answers to my two questions were immediate, relevant, and to the point. However, I had asked it a trick question. The first to summarize a fathomless subject. And the second to trip it up. All-in-all I think we time and acuity this can become a very helpful research too. - res

LET'S EXAMINE MY FIRST QUESTION

I hope to utilize Artificial Intelligence more often in the future in my research and reports. When I do I will notate my use of OpenAI's CHATGPT as opposed to my own writings. In doing so I'm hoping to find the pith of relevance between process philosophy and theology with traditional Christianity which sits upon a plethora of non-process paradigms. Paradigms which require deep extraction and expansion.

The idea of God; of God's activities and agendas; of God's intimate participation with creation and our lives; of God's redeeming, loving, atoning actions; and of our many earthy responses to this God, has shown itself to be a complicated historical and present subjective-objective existential array of good-and-bad responses by man to one another and creation itself.

Process theology is based on how our organic world and socio-eco societies work. We see processual cycles and results reflected again and again in the bible though usually unobserved by the bible's own narratives and Western church theologies.

Process is how the world works. A process-based cosmology and metaphysics of ontology attempts to capture the profoundly-formative nature of God and creation into a resulting processual philosophy and theology made the more meaningful to the world we live in, and lying about us, when understanding its rhythms... and seeing its harmonies... as we learn to "go with the flow" of God and creation.

Overall, one might say Whitehead's process thought (originally called the "process of organism") is all about symbiance (cooperative unions) and holism (personal and communal intersections with self, others and nature). Or in the Chinese/Japanese ?Korean parlances of "balance and rhythm" as reflected by their cultures. But it also is far deeper than those simplified observations... which is why the branches of cosmological metaphyics and ontological theologies, among other derivatives, has arisen through the late 20th century and into today's metamodern era.

It provides promise to religious bodies and religious people that we can act more humanely to one another. More charitably and wisely. That the faiths we carry have relevancy in this world and to those around us when leaning into the love-and-peace paradigms of wholeness and being. Of Beings who are Becoming... more than they are... more as intended by God's Self in God's creational manifestations. When doing so we, as a freewill species, and within our internal being, may find deeper resonance with life, the universe, and God's purpose in this world.

SOME CENTRAL IDEAS OF PROCESS THOUGHT

• Process Thought is a very real reality with the deep promise to value all things as they are;

• It's difference as an applied philosophy is to regenerate and rejuvenate all things about us... itself a mirror image of how God and the cosmos themselves work and function;

• That each living community of communities is filled with loving potential and ability;

• That it recognizes value in difference;

• That it seeks to build peace into all relationships around us;

• And to know that what we see-and-feel by a life-generating metaphysic such as a process pholosophic-theology is speaking to the very vibe which moves God to be God;

• A vibe which tells us the becoming of God, and the cosmos, and ourselves, is a natural socio-eco-spirit evolution of life around us;

• That a processual cosmology is a deeply connected and intertwined panrelational, panexperiential, and panpsychic process between the parts and wholes of God's cosmic universe.

In other words, process theology is simply describing the Christ-event of the bible, but when doing so leaning into all processual forms of this cosmically salvific event rather than the traditional Christian forms which emphasis other observations out-of-sync with the nature and being of God and God's cosmos.

A process-metaphysic is no will-o'-the wisp series of Westernized Platonisms, Aristotelian-Scholastic thoughts, or Classic Enlightenment/Modernal philosophies whether European/Continental or American; all of which seem to argue for various forms of stoicism, legalism, isolationalism, or conformal doctrines of a militarised church socially, economically, politically, and ecologically.

And though Whitehead was seeking to recapture the processual propositions of past philosophers from earlier ages as far back as early religions and non-Hellenised Greek thinking, what his student John Cobb saw in it was a process theology for peace, goodness, and life-generating responses to all errant processes which are devolving forms of processual life changes. 

Process theology then seeks to underline the goodness and love of a life-generating God fully involved in life-atoning-and-redeeming all becoming events towards beautify, wholeness, and solidarity back to itself. To essential "come back into tune" with creation's generative teleology.

And though traditional Christianity says its "all these things" we plainly see that it has not been "all these things" to either man nor beast, stream or wood, communities of difference and communities of others. More rather, traditional Christianity has been and continues to become unholistic to the cosmos around us; harmfully deterministic in its exploitation and oppression to all things its comes in contact with; and deeply "unbiblical" in it's propositions of who God is and isn't in it's estimation. Which means like Christian's professed Savior, the church itself must repent and re-confess what it's all about by getting it's practices, attitudes, behaviors, creeds, and dogmas back in tune with the God they attest but do not know.

CONCLUSION

Lastly, process theology reflects Jesus' atonement as it's divine event is reflected back upon itself to the very "Life-giving" nature of our Loving God indwelling all hearts and world about us. God's atoning and redeeming work at Calvary is but part-and-parcel of life's creational beauty and essence. We see in it cute little puppies, babies, hobbies, and projects of unity all around us. The processual revolution of Jesus' Love speaks to the functional revolution going on about us though we see it not nor live it as we should.

The Cross then was a deep signifier by God of what life consists of around us. Divine-Life is the continual renewal and repurposing of the Spirit-life everywhere indwelling as it wrestles with creational freewill and indetermination which confronts a freewill creational every moment of it's existence. By it's very core a freewill creation must chose life and not death. That life will always be a challenge, filled with hardships and suffering against the very things which would devolve life from it's fuller potentials. Whitehead called them profound consequential results with ongoing potentials of life-releasing generative value. The church calls them the grace and peace of Spirit-filled Living when lived in God's Love. Process calls them one-and-the-same.

That divinity sovereignty is best described as God's giving of God's very Self into the very core processes of creation's DNA. That creation - such as humanity - is plagued with choices of good and evil, sin and love. And that it feels the deep drag and pull of creation's processually generative panpsychic Cosmic Being, it's processual organism, as weighing against all within itself which is out-of-sync.

The Christ event reflects as much. We are out-of-tune with God and with ourselves even as creation is fraught with the indeterminancy of it's freewill being. And yet, the Cross of Christ reminds us that God is intimately present with us and creation in actively transforming wayward fait-accomplis back to itself and to the very meaning of restitutional redemptive processes of the God of the cosmos. (*The meaning of FAIT ACCOMPLI is a thing accomplished and presumably irreversible.)

This then is how I would interpret OpenAI's CHATGPT opening answer to my first question. It's sentences were mundane and repeatitive but got to the general point of how we might intersect the old wineskins of Christian thought to the new wineskins of processual Christology when applied to contemporary thinking today.

A very simple request to speak to how process theology might reflect the very heart of the bible's Christ event deemed by the church as the world's mid-point of salvific history. That all which led before the Cross, and all which resulted after the Cross, - in the best of senses of loving becoming - was fully reflective, instrumental, even significantly recharging, of God's Selfhood in active redemptive participation towards God's insolent, and fully becoming partnerships with creation, with ourselves, and with all those apart from ourselves.

The holograms of our universe are but a microcasm of the stated organic whole we participate within physically, spiritually, emotionally, and theistically. God not only saves all... God is fully saving all each and every moment of every day forever and forever.

Peace,

R.E. Slater

January 28, 2022

It's time for Christianity to EVOLVE!