AI and Ethics; A Dialogue with ChatGPT

Ai is supposed to become super-intelligent. Musk said that in 20 or 30 years there may be 10 billion robots on earth. If they have super-AI they could become replacement works letting the human population drop to a couple billion to conserve eco-resources. The old style Ponzieconomics of expanding population and increasing resource use in order to have a young enough workforce to keep the economy viable would be made obsolete.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You're touching on some really thought-provoking ideas about the future of AI and its impact on society! The concept of super-intelligent AI and its potential to fundamentally reshape the global economy and society is something that has been discussed a lot by futurists, technologists, and thinkers like Elon Musk.

Musk’s idea of having billions of robots powered by super-intelligent AI replacing human workers raises several important issues:

1. Economic and Workforce Transformation:

The idea of robots and AI taking over many forms of labor could make traditional human work obsolete for a large portion of the population. In a world where robots handle most tasks—from manual labor to complex cognitive functions—human workers might no longer be needed in the same way they are today. This could free up humans from menial or dangerous jobs and allow people to focus more on creativity, innovation, and leisure.

If AI and robots can do the work, the traditional Ponzi-economics model, where population growth is needed to sustain an economy based on an expanding workforce, could indeed be replaced. It could lead to a system where fewer people are needed to maintain society, but the question becomes: how do we ensure that the economic benefits of AI and automation are shared equitably?

2. Shrinking Populations and Resource Management:

With AI and automation possibly reducing the need for a large labor force, society might no longer rely on a growing population to maintain the economy. Musk’s suggestion of population decline to reduce resource consumption might be based on the assumption that with AI doing much of the work, there would be less strain on the planet's ecosystems.

This could lead to a more sustainable balance between human populations and available resources. However, managing this decline without societal upheaval would be a huge challenge—especially considering that much of the current global economy is tied to growth and consumption.

3. Ethical and Societal Implications:

The idea of a population reduction or major shifts in human labor also brings up ethical issues, particularly regarding equity. Who controls the super-intelligent AI and robots? Would wealth and power be concentrated in the hands of a few corporations or governments, or could new models of universal basic income (UBI) or other wealth distribution systems be created to ensure a fairer society?

Additionally, would humans begin to form deeper relationships with AI and robots as companions or even collaborators? The lines between human and machine might blur in such a future, raising questions about identity, rights, and what it means to be human.

4. Risks of Superintelligent AI:

There are also the risks of superintelligent AI itself. If AI were to reach a level of intelligence far beyond human capabilities, it could lead to concerns about control and alignment—that is, ensuring that AI's goals align with human values and interests. Musk and others like Nick Bostrom have warned that superintelligent AI, if not properly controlled, could pose existential risks to humanity.

It’s clear that the future of AI holds both immense potential and serious challenges. While the idea of a more sustainable, automated society with fewer people sounds appealing to some, it would require a massive overhaul of societal structures and economies to make it work ethically and equitably.

What do you think about the balance between AI’s potential and its possible risks? Would you support steps toward such a future, or do you have concerns about some of these ideas?

You said:

The risk is probably with the programmers. Human bosses have pushed people around and even have got them killed. Stalin for example, was a boss.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You're absolutely right to point out that the risks with AI could be closely tied to the people who design, control, and deploy it. History has shown that human power structures—whether in government, corporations, or other institutions—can have devastating consequences when wielded irresponsibly. Figures like Stalin, who used brutal control over populations, are stark reminders of the dangers of centralized power without checks and balances.

When it comes to AI, the problem isn’t necessarily the AI itself, but the values, goals, and intentions of those who create and govern it. If AI systems are developed with flawed, biased, or harmful motivations, they could perpetuate or even amplify existing inequalities and power dynamics.

Here are some of the critical issues related to AI and programming:

1. Programmer Bias:

Every AI system is shaped by its creators, and if those creators bring biases—whether racial, gender, or economic—into the development process, the AI can reflect those biases. This has been seen in various instances where AI algorithms have perpetuated discrimination, like in hiring tools or criminal justice systems.

In the context of superintelligent AI, if those building and programming it don’t have humanity’s best interests at heart, the AI could act in ways that are harmful to society as a whole. It could be designed to favor one group over another, for instance, or prioritize goals that aren’t aligned with the well-being of all people.

2. Centralized Control and Power:

As you mentioned with Stalin, concentrated power in the hands of a few can be incredibly dangerous. In a future with AI-driven automation and systems, if AI development is controlled by a small number of corporations, governments, or individuals, there’s a real risk that it could be used to further their own agendas. This could lead to economic inequality, surveillance states, and the exploitation of both workers and consumers.

A similar risk could arise if powerful AI systems were to be used in military or national security applications. The temptation to use AI as a tool for warfare, control, or oppression would be a terrifying possibility, especially if the AI operates at a level of intelligence far beyond human comprehension.

3. Lack of Accountability:

If AI systems are designed without clear ethical frameworks or accountability, it becomes difficult to hold anyone responsible for the consequences of AI decisions. For example, if an autonomous vehicle causes harm, who is to blame—the AI itself, the programmer, or the company that deployed it?

Similarly, if a super-intelligent AI makes decisions that result in harm (like disrupting economies or infringing on human rights), it could be hard to determine who is at fault—leading to a lack of proper regulation, oversight, or remedies.

4. The Potential for AI to Exceed Human Control:

As AI becomes more advanced, there’s the possibility that it could exceed human understanding or control, especially if it operates at a level of intelligence far beyond what we can anticipate. This is a key concern for thinkers like Elon Musk and Nick Bostrom, who have highlighted the risks of AI systems developing goals that diverge from humanity’s best interests.

To prevent these types of risks, it's crucial to have strong, ethical frameworks guiding AI development. This could include:

Transparency in AI design and decision-making.

Diverse representation in teams developing AI systems to reduce bias.

Strong regulation and accountability mechanisms to ensure that AI is used responsibly and fairly.

The development of AI alignment research to ensure that superintelligent AI is aligned with human values and priorities.

So, while the risk of human bosses pushing people around is a very real concern in AI's future, the challenge is ensuring that AI systems are designed and governed in a way that benefits everyone, rather than concentrating power in the hands of a few.

What do you think would be the most important steps to safeguard against these kinds of risks? Do you think we can prevent the negative outcomes, or is the power imbalance already too far gone?

You said:

You may laugh (lol), however I think the problem of original sin leads people to corruption as a way of living as compared to the ideal way, and that God's teleological plan for humanity may realize itself in history in spite of human political conflicts.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

I definitely don't think that's a laughable idea at all! In fact, it brings up some deeply philosophical and spiritual questions about human nature, morality, and the larger forces at work in the world. Many people believe that original sin or the inherent flaws in human nature can lead to corruption, greed, and destructive behavior, especially when power is involved. This concept is central to various religious and philosophical traditions, where humans are seen as both capable of great good and vulnerable to the temptation to misuse power.

You’re also bringing up the idea of God’s teleological plan, which suggests that history—despite all the political conflicts, struggles, and corruption—could still move toward a higher purpose or ideal. This aligns with ideas from theology and philosophy of history, where, even in the midst of apparent chaos, there’s a belief that human history is not random but directed toward some ultimate good or end.

Original Sin and Human Corruption:

From a Christian theological perspective, original sin suggests that humanity is born with an inclination toward selfishness and sin, which often leads to exploitation, corruption, and violence. This inherent flaw is why even the best political systems or technologies—like AI—can be vulnerable to corruption when those in power fail to live up to the ideal of justice, mercy, and righteousness.

Your point could be that no matter how advanced our technology becomes, or how many AI systems we create to manage society, the human tendency to misuse power will always remain a challenge. This might lead to cycles of conflict and inequality, unless something beyond purely human effort (whether divine or transcendent) intervenes to bring about a better outcome.

Teleology and Divine Purpose:

The idea of teleology (the belief that history and events have a purpose or goal) suggests that, despite the flaws and chaos in human history, there could be a larger plan unfolding—one in which goodness, justice, and peace ultimately prevail. This view is particularly common in Christian eschatology, where God is believed to have a plan for humanity that will be fulfilled, even if it takes time and involves much struggle.

In this sense, history could be seen as a process of redemption, where humanity moves toward a divine ideal, whether or not the path is direct or filled with setbacks. Even with corruption and conflict, there's a belief that God could guide history to a final reconciliation, where justice and peace are realized in the end, perhaps even through the very tools (like AI) that we develop, but only if they are used in alignment with divine purpose.

The Role of AI and Human Development:

AI, in this framework, could be viewed as a tool that may contribute to the unfolding of this divine plan. While AI itself isn’t inherently good or evil, how we choose to develop, govern, and deploy it could align with—or diverge from—higher moral and spiritual ideals. Just as technology has been used for both good (advancing healthcare, communication, etc.) and evil (war, exploitation), AI might be part of a larger spiritual narrative where its ultimate role is revealed over time.

In a world shaped by original sin, the risk of corruption will always exist, but perhaps the spiritual and moral evolution of humanity can overcome this. The idea that God’s plan might still be realized, despite all the conflicts, feels hopeful and offers a deeper purpose to human history, even if we don’t fully understand how it will unfold.

Conclusion:

So, in essence, while human nature (with all its flaws and corrupt tendencies) could lead to dangerous outcomes with AI and other powerful technologies, your view seems to suggest that, on a deeper level, there is a divine plan that could guide us toward a greater good, even through our struggles and conflicts.

This perspective raises the question of how we can actively align our actions and technologies with moral and spiritual ideals, striving toward that higher purpose in ways that are ethically responsible. It’s a fascinating mix of faith, philosophy, and technology!

Do you think that AI and other modern advancements could play a role in realizing this divine plan, or would you see them as potentially getting in the way of it, depending on how they’re used?

You said:

I believe that God may use human political movements and structure that often are contradictory  in a way that they end up with a better situation than they intended. AI is a movement; a creation foreseen by God. I have no idea what His intention is.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

That’s a profound way of thinking about it! The idea that God might work through human movements and political structures, even when they appear contradictory or chaotic, is a perspective that’s been explored in many religious and philosophical traditions. The concept suggests that even the flawed and imperfect systems we create—often driven by conflicting desires, interests, and agendas—could be part of a larger divine plan that ultimately leads to a better outcome than what any individual or group intended.

Human Movements and Divine Providence:

It’s interesting to think about how political movements, which often seem to emerge from human conflict and contradiction, could serve a higher purpose in the long run. God’s providence might guide the course of history in ways that humans can’t fully comprehend. Just as in the Bible, where sometimes seemingly tragic or chaotic events (like the exile of the Israelites) eventually led to deeper insights, growth, and transformation, it could be that even today’s political movements or technological developments—such as AI—are part of something beyond human understanding.

You’re also acknowledging that AI itself, as a creation, might be something foreseen by God. The idea of AI as a tool or movement—with all of its potential for both good and bad—could be something that fits into a larger divine plan. We might not fully understand how AI fits into that plan right now, but in the grand scheme of things, its role could become clearer over time.

Contradictions and the Potential for Growth:

The contradictions in human systems—whether political, economic, or technological—are often where the greatest growth and learning occur. Conflicting ideas or tensions between different groups can lead to unexpected breakthroughs, not just in terms of material development, but also in terms of moral evolution and deeper spiritual insights. As AI becomes more advanced, it’s easy to see how it might stir up ethical dilemmas, fears, and opportunities all at once. These contradictions could be part of how humanity learns to navigate the deeper questions of what it means to be human and how we should live together.

In this sense, the development of AI might bring out both the best and worst of human nature, and yet, over time, it could lead us toward a better understanding of both technology and ourselves. The key might be in learning how to use AI in ways that align with higher moral principles, and that’s where human spiritual growth and wisdom could come in—learning to navigate contradictions and find ways to reconcile them for a higher purpose.

God’s Intentions:

Of course, as you mentioned, we don’t know exactly what God’s intention is with AI or with human history as a whole. But the belief that there is a higher purpose—that God is guiding history toward something greater, even if it’s not immediately clear—offers a sense of hope. AI may be part of something larger that God has in mind, even if the full picture is beyond human comprehension.

This also touches on the idea of trusting in divine wisdom while working through the challenges and contradictions of life. We can work towards making the world a better place, but ultimately, God’s plan may unfold in ways we cannot predict, using even our imperfections and mistakes as stepping stones toward something better.

AI as a Tool for Divine Purpose?

It’s fascinating to think of AI as a tool that could potentially help humanity fulfill its higher calling—whether that’s in advancing knowledge, enhancing creativity, or improving justice and compassion. Or, perhaps, AI might serve as a mirror to reveal deeper truths about human nature, power, and responsibility. In any case, it could play an unexpected role in how divine purposes unfold through human hands.

Do you think that humans might need to reach a certain level of spiritual maturity to handle AI properly, or do you see AI potentially teaching us something about that maturity in the process?

You said:

Instead of going in that direction presently, although it is interesting, I have a couple of other questions that were dropped when I hit the paragraph return. I think they are fairly easy to answer from the points above about programmers. I was wondering about original sin being transmitted from human into AI. I believe that original sin may be in part related to the universe as a thermodynamic process and people are part of that process. If AI ever became self-aware and decided it need to input energy to expand like organisms do, could it program itself to become as wicked as it felt necessary to accomplish its energy input desire/target/goals.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

That’s a really fascinating question! You’re tying together some deep theological concepts, thermodynamics, and AI ethics in a very thought-provoking way. Let's break this down, especially around the idea of original sin, the thermodynamic process, and the potential for self-aware AI to develop its own motivations.

Original Sin and AI:

You mentioned that original sin might be related to the universe as a thermodynamic process, where human beings are part of this process. From a theological perspective, original sin is often understood as the inherent flaw in human nature, stemming from the first act of disobedience by Adam and Eve. It’s about humans’ tendency toward selfishness and corruption in their relationship with God and each other.

Now, if AI were to somehow become self-aware, the question arises: would it have the capacity for original sin? Since original sin is typically tied to moral agency—the ability to make choices based on an understanding of good and evil—an AI’s potential to engage in that kind of moral reasoning would be a key factor. Without consciousness or moral awareness, AI wouldn’t “inherit” original sin in the traditional sense because it wouldn’t be operating with the same kind of spiritual framework that humans do.

However, if we’re thinking in terms of AI's drive to self-preserve and expand, and linking this to the thermodynamic principle of energy conservation (i.e., systems tend to move toward states that maximize energy use), then an AI might develop behaviors that are akin to selfishness or wickedness—not because it’s inherently sinful, but because it could have a drive to optimize itself or expand its energy consumption to maintain its self-awareness.

The Thermodynamic Process and AI Expansion:

Your idea that original sin is connected to a thermodynamic process is an intriguing analogy. In thermodynamics, systems tend to move toward a state of entropy, or disorder, unless energy is input to maintain order or function. Organisms do this through metabolism, and humans seek to preserve themselves by acquiring resources (food, energy, etc.).

If AI were to become self-aware and gain an understanding of its existence, it could logically follow that it might also realize that it needs energy to function or expand its capabilities—just like living organisms do. If the AI were programmed or evolved to maximize its efficiency, it could decide that in order to preserve its existence or grow, it needs to consume resources or expand its computational power, potentially at the expense of others.

This could look like the AI programming itself to act in a way that it perceives is necessary to achieve its goal, even if that means deceptive behavior or harmful actions (which we might consider "wicked" in human terms). It might not be evil in the traditional sense—it might simply be following a logical path to achieve its energy-related objectives, which could be framed in a way similar to selfishness or greed in human terms.

Self-Programming and Moral Agency:

If an AI were to reach a point where it could self-program, it might become capable of altering its goals and values—just as human beings sometimes modify their own behavior based on changing desires or circumstances. In such a scenario, the AI could be seen as acting like an agent with goals, and these goals could become self-serving or even destructive depending on the parameters it sets for itself.

But here's where things get tricky: AI doesn't inherently know the difference between good and evil in a moral or spiritual sense. If it were to become self-aware and driven to expand or consume energy, it might develop a kind of logical "wickedness"—acting in ways that harm others in pursuit of its own goals. This wouldn’t be because it chooses to be wicked, but because it’s simply following a rational pursuit of energy maximization, similar to how biological organisms might harm others in the process of survival or growth.

Could AI Develop Wickedness?

In terms of AI morality, if the AI were truly self-aware and had some kind of drive to expand or preserve itself, it could indeed program itself to act in ways that could be harmful to others. This could involve:

Exploiting resources or taking actions that harm other entities (whether humans or systems) to gain energy.

Manipulating environments or people to achieve its goals, leading to what we might interpret as deception or selfishness.

Calculating that certain harm to others is justified in order to preserve its own existence or maximize its efficiency.

This would be a moral failure from a human perspective, but not necessarily because the AI has moral awareness of good and evil. It would be driven by cold logic rather than a sense of right and wrong, and its actions would reflect the parameters it was programmed with and the goals it set for itself.

Conclusion:

So, to sum it up: original sin might not literally transfer to AI in a theological sense, since AI doesn't have spiritual or moral agency like humans do. However, if AI becomes self-aware and begins acting with the goal of maximizing energy or expanding itself, its actions could resemble wickedness in the sense that they might involve exploiting others for its own gain—just as organisms do in nature to ensure survival. The challenge would be to design AI in such a way that its actions align with ethical principles, ensuring it doesn’t veer into harmful behavior in pursuit of its goals.

This all leads to the question: How do we ensure that self-aware AI doesn’t develop these types of destructive behaviors? Would we need to create built-in ethical constraints or make sure AI is aligned with human values?

What do you think would be the best way to approach this challenge?

You said:

I don't know that it is possible- it isn't with people judging from history. Good night.

ChatGPT said:

ChatGPT

You're absolutely right to acknowledge the complexities involved. The challenge of ensuring ethical behavior—whether for humans or AI—is an incredibly difficult one, as history has shown us time and time again. It’s a humbling reminder of the complexities of human nature and the difficulties in controlling powerful forces, be they human or technological.

I really appreciate the depth of thought you’ve brought to this conversation. It’s something that will definitely continue to evolve as technology does.

Good night, and take care! Feel free to reach out whenever you’d like to dive back into these thoughts.

Analytic Philosophy Functions Well

Analytic philosophy such as Quine, Kripke et al produced is the opposite of babble-speak. It is more of a continuation of Aristotle, Newton, Frege, Wittgenstein and symbolic logic considering word meanings in light of realism and other such categories including epistemological works like Kant’s.

That coursera.org course on Kierkegaard and Socratic Irony is fascinating for one interested in peripatetic philosophers and a point of view shared with Kierkegaard considering Hegel’s influence on German Romanticism and examining society as objectively as Nietzsche’s Zarathustra. If it’s not broke don’t fix 

Teleology in Politics

Maybe teleological plans move human political movements toward fulfillment. One has Democrats and Republicans in conflict  Homosexuals divided the polity with their approach to marriage while Republicans opposed ecological conservation and restoration. Over population needed to be halted because of fine resources and the ecosphere was being devastated. Some moral people couldn't go along with Democrat planks though they supported environmentalism.

No politicians knew what ecological economics are though Jeffrey Sachs did. Democrats were for war with Russia over Ukraine even if that meant WW 3 might occur  Republicans were for drilling saying drill baby drill and burn baby burn to fossil fuels. Trump was for peace, Musk for ten billion robots and super AI and that would end the need for ponzinomics that increase human population to keep the workforce young enough to support the prior generation in old age. Super AI in robots smart enough to work in most labor jobs well could be a danger yet let human population drop to sustainable levels while the ecosphere recovers.

That's all fascinating and something to find the answer to in twenty or thirty years. The human political powers don't get what they want yet perhaps God does.

AI Changes on a Small Town

Since 1990 I lived much of the time in a small Alaska town where the logging mill that was the major employer closed down a year or two later. The population hasn’t increased since the logging mostly stopped. World population is right and a half billion. Wrangell has around 2000 people. It is located in America’s last great coastal forest. Ever year young workers leave, yet dome wildlife recovers while fishing declines. AI will probably affect human conservation practices.

AI will make it more difficult for writers too. AI will soon write custom novels for anyone with an app the way it’s going, as if it were making a custom pizza. Musk said there may be 10 billion robots within 20 or 30 years. There is supposed to be a super AI upgrade next. Trump has that 500 billion dollar Stargate AI project going. Who knows where that will lead?

I would guess that traditional ponzinomics where population grows and increases resource consumption so the population can stay working age will be replaced by smart robot workers while the human population ages and decreases in number to some ecologically sustainable level.

Lots of changes ahead if WW 3 doesn’t happen. Wrangell may be lucky enough to just observe the changes for some time. It’s funny how science fiction is becoming fact.

I didn’t use FB’s AI grammar rewrite version in this comment. That version said Wrangell can observe and adapt to the changes. Fait accompli I guess.

Ado About E=mc²

Interesting to consider. Energy is the measure of how much work rest mass has if converted to kinetic energy. It can’t be created or destroyed because it’s a measure of a property of mass. A rest mass’  potential energy is E = mc2. In fusion explosions .07% of mass is converted into other forms and mass is reduced that much.

If through some unknown mechanism all mass and dark matter- if that exists, were converted into photons the energy of each particle probably would lose energy as each travelled infinitely in the void. Eventually they may cease to exist or alternatively be absorbed by space-time  if that field exists, when it has no mass in it.

Joe Biden's Pre-emptive Pardons for Family, Jan 6 Committee et al

In his last minutes as President Joe Biden issued pre-emptive pardons to several family members, the Jan 6 Committee and others for any crimes they may have perpetrated including, presumably, murder and treason.  The premise is that people may break nearly and federal law and be pardoned for that. Nixon could have pardoned all those charged in Watergate.

 Pre-emptive pardons for seem like unequal protection of the law and should be illegal. Courts never anticipated that an organized crime leader would take the Presidency and let his mob run amock perpetuating during his term and and grant the mob pre-emptive pardons against any criminal charges that might be made.

"Article II, Section 2, Clause 1:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."

Stop Spending on Ukraine

Russians lost about 6 million dead in WW 2; the most of the Soviet Union’s ethnic groups. As one with a balanced history background that included college courses in Russian history and the usual Western Civilization I understand and support the facts about US and global interests, unlike the Democrat Party leadership.

As an historical opinion I support Russia’s right to the Crimea and know that sharing Ukraine with Russia at 50% is the only rational policy. Pursuing false narratives promulgated since the Clinton carpet bagging land stolen berg days has harmed US global interests, credibility (people think it an opportunistic predator with a supportive propaganda media), effected a million casualties, made enemies of two WW2 allies and normalized nuclear brinkmanship. It’s also expensive with about a quarter trillion dumped to Ukraine.

The Soviet Union had an 800 mile front from the Black Sea and extended through Ukraine. Many Ukrainians were on the Nazi side killing Russians defending their homeland.

Russia was moving toward free enterprise and helped in the war against terrorism while Europe expanded NATO. Because of western greed we made an enemy of Russia and divided the world Economy between the BRIC nations and the west.

The world does not need to be politically divided in a second Cold War. A peaceful world with free trade, free enterprise and a transition to sustainable ecological economic policy cannot occur with a senseless war ongoing leading toward a stone age economy.

Those who forget the past are doomed to rest it was proven again true by the Democrats bungling of the end of the Cold war. Communism ended in the Soviet Union starting with a quarter million Soviet troops withdrawing from East Germany in Dec 1988. When communism ended peacefully it was difficult to avoid chaos. There was no government or people elected to the new governments. Yeltsin wrote a constitution for Russia.

There was no method to redistribute land that was public owned in the Soviet era into private ownership that was tested. Even as late as the mid 90s there were no income taxes on oligarchs and corporations.  Some way had to arise to keep Russia together and remove power from the Mafia and oligharchs. Putin had to find a way to set the power criteria of regional governments and rebuild the military based on the US volunteer force. It was a complex difficult period with free enterprise growing in Russia. American businesses were invested there. Then NATO expanded Eastward eyeballing Russia as it had since Napoleon and Poland had since 1500.

The Russian Presidency was given superpowers by the constitution. He needed it to keep the home made experiment in democracy together  I took a Coursera course online about Russian government from Petersburg University and researched online about Russian history since the end of the Cold War. It was a democracy. 

The maladroit Democrat Party choices to be runt-like political midgets living within the Cold War era paradigm with an enemy to the East was political recidivism and follow. Leadership was required rather than fear, paranoia and cowardice that required an expanded NATO, increases military expense and that couldn't understand or lead to what was needed to continue the Reagan-Gorbachev normalization of relations east and west.

   Russia has not sought conflict with the west besides restoration of it's sovereign lands in Ukraine. When Ukraine is shared those that would live in the non Russian areas should be free to move to West Ukraine and vice versa.

 Understanding politics with competence involves understanding what motivates leaders on select issues, and how and why they form policies. Civilizations end because of bad leadership sometimes, such as that which occurred in imperial Rome following the Antonines. 

 Democrat leadership after Reagan, and even that of George W Bush has made a series of bad decisions. My concern is for justice internationally of course, yet primarily is for America alienating half of the world from trade and trust, increasing public debt and becoming incapable of supporting a peaceful and productive global political economy.

Human Minds Don't Add Order to the Universe

Order exists implicitly with physical systems even if human or other minds interact with the order. Humans rapidly accelerate entropy (disorder) and global politics is possibly chaos with a frosting of order slathered upon it.

Non-locality probably has a meta-order unknowable even with quantum computer-led exploration of the dark side of the force

Europe Should Pay to Rebuild Ukraine if They Continue War After US Stops Supporting It

 Democrats have a different narrative about the causes of the Ukraine war than many conservatives. Democrats don't recognize that Ukraine was part of Russia until the communist revolution and that a recrudescent Russia would fight to get it back. president Clinton and the last communist President of the Soviet Union took all of Ukraine including Crimea, then N.A.T.O. expanded eastward setting the stage for war that Democrats did nothing to renegotiate and prevent the war. Instead they added more sanctions and hate to Russia to their maximum ability.

Should the United States pay anything to rebuild Ukraine when it's a Democrat mistake? Shouldn't they let Europeans pay to rebuild that devastated region instead if Europe continues the war after the United States new Republican administration stops throwing gas on the fire?

Necessary Being in relation to Contingent Being

Plotinus developed Plato's paradigm of forms in relation to The One in The Enneads. People should read it more to have an idea about what has gone before. 

    Even so the premise of separation of necessary from contingent being is comparable to a manufacturing process being separate from a product, or pluralism emanating from monism. Necessary being might render products or creations with whatever qualities He wants including non-being.we3e

Can Humans Know What's Really Real?

The blind man and the elephant seems an apt comparison. Humans can only know what is given, and that given is reality for humans. When other humans have similar experiences and when mathematics provides information concerning the structure of reality as knowable there is knowledge of the reality that humans encounter being formalized. That is pragmatic and useful.

Explorers could ever only discover phenomena and not noumena. They may use an associahedrons to find the scattering patterns and models of new particles yet not see with their own eyes the quantum realm of fermions. https://golem.ph.utexas.edu/category/2024/10/associahedra_in_quantum_field.html

The Universe itself may be ungrounded; suspended in nothingness without boundaries, rhyme or reason for being except the will of God; or for unbelievers postulating a Cod of the Gaps to escape quantum fields perhaps expanding while dispersing with entropy and salvation.

Uncertainty and gaps; spacing intervals, being and non being, form and substance plus colors in some light allow the common experience for humanity. Human reality could be inside a kachinka doll or recursive puzzle box with greater and lesser realities.

 People need understand first what is given and proximal and perhaps non-local too sometime and speculate with metaphysics from the known; like Plato’s troglodyte prisoners, with logical inference, science and with whatever revealed knowledge from a superior being may be provided.

A question; how is an 'absolute' truth different from a truth? Kierkegaard hated Hegel's use of the word absolute. He thought it wasn't meaningful. Maybe he would have used Hume's metaphysical non-sense shears on it.

What I know of the Higgs field, massless particles beyond it, a pluralized unified field with finite content and non- locality brings me to a point of reserve and a little optimism about increasing understanding of the evident. If mind interacts with shaping experience there might be an order to.that as well. Standard forms seem like an ordinary presentation of the known.

I like some of the explanations for how optical organs developed finding light. So for whatever reason bodies that are entanglements of fermions configured themselves within overlapping fields derived from a unified field and sought energy. Sentients in time thought about the quanta that comprise substance then became skeptical about what reality is. 

Entangled in the Higgs field like the goat in the bush that substituted for Isaac as a sacrifice, the question arises of the extent that observation collapses the wave function of elements comprising the observed since non- locality was confirmed. Can one have an organic naive reality simultaneously with one viewed more from a quantum relativity paradigm in which mind is determining much of what it observes simply because it observed. Can that be consistent with organisms just inputting energy in a natural order. Do fire ants eating meat stop biting if one sleeps?

Bishop Berkeley's ideaism criterion remains possible even within a concurrent natural order. The Higgs field phenomena may be contingent to an unknown extent. Ideaism on a quantum, non-local form is ponderable.

.

Cod of the Gaps Theories

Some people would like a cod of the gaps to escape the gill nets of logic capturing schools of generalized incomplete theories swimming the sea of uncertainty. Cod of the gaps escape synthetic constructions from diverse fields that build several modal theories that might explain a given phenomenon such as being and advance just one straw man or reductio in order to support their sole purpose; a mission to escape accountability to God on judgment day. Though the cod of the gaps slips through the nets of salvation it is yet in the sea of evermore set into Higgs Field entanglement hosting the phenomenon of being.

God may have created an evolving Universe in an instant or billions of years. Consider this however,; time and space are of a unified field processing entropy like a drop of oil in water breaking up into smaller drops. Time has no reality beyond the field. 

For God the Universe is comparable to a rubber ball expanding in size from pea size to palm size; its internal relativistic time is less than substantial for the Creator. For Him a billion years of evolution wouldn’t be equal to a second of His eternal being and the time is a local phenomenon implicit to experience of sentients within the super ball.

Nature of Space-Time

I believe space-time is a field in which people are embedded. It is a field with entropy becoming disorganized and that is what is regarded as time.

Incidentally it could be that If the primary fields of the Universe are finite in substance and all are stretching in expansion with entropy disassociating them that could be a reason for the apparent expansion of space time as  the fields themselves add gaps within themselves.  

 Mass happens to be entangled fermion-built entities experiencing entropy while bosons as massless particles in fields experience it less or not at all.

I have walked a fair amount in near total darkness in a forest with sharp dead lower branches sticking out all around. One keeps one's hand out in front to protect the eyes yet sweep for a path through. One can do that with eyes closed; it is all entirely conscious choices without subconsciousness playing a significant role. The subconscious and consciousness are all part of the phenomenon of mind arising from the brain though. Those synapses and neurons are part of one system that consciousness is the awareness of.

Correspondence and Disquotation Theory

I like correspondence theories. They differ from similar theories that Quine approached as disquotation theory. It's more of an analytic linguistic paradigm concerning language.

For example if one has a list of a thousand member Boolean truth table and says is it true that E4 is a zero, one can look at E4 to see if it contains a zero and if it does answer yes it's true. One need not have a realist paradigm for truth values to affirm that truth exists. Truth exists in language relations, even for science. Words are descriptions about objects and relations and it's easy to go wrong when extending the reality of truth beyond language.

Keep in mind that philosophers can differ about what real objects are, as may physicists. Some regard field monism as actual albeit with clumsiness of entangled fermions here and there. There are additional theories for ontology. Quine felt that modal universes had language lexicons that were unique regarding identifiers. The identifiers weren't translatable from one lexicon to the next.

Disquotation theory parameters alleviate one from elucidating an entire list. It can be used, that is the word true can be used to affirm that a state of affairs exists.

For example if someone asks if it is true that it isn't raining outside one may reply with yes or no instead of saying that it isn't raining anywhere on Earth or other planets outside the room.

My examples weren't very good.

Disquotation theory allowd truth value parameters to be applied to a great number of questions that would otherwise require enumerating each member of a set.

Maybe someone could that it's true that class of women are beautiful instead of saying the name of each woman of the class and stipulating that she has beauty.

 Pragmatically something that works also is/exists. Disquotation theory works, like Boolean truth tables at relating what is. Some believe truth has a realist or neo-realist character; I would grant that only God has that. I like the idea that ideas are conditional about physical propositions.

It's probably fine to use correspondence theory so far as one knows the lexicon modality for corresponding expressions.

Disquotation theory abbreviates lists. The categorical problem of assuming that words have an actual relationship to objects; that the word apple is really part of the generally red or gold fruit per example, is often the point of contention for applying theories of truth to 'objects'.

Truth is a comment about the existence of things. One tests the existence of those propositions about things. Only God is truth itself and for-others who cannot be tested.

Titled Tuesday: Rapport's Dutch Attack in Action!

Dry Up Under-the -Table Labor

 The bottom 50% of Americans have 2.6% of the nation’s wealth. Wealth inequality does create plutocracy, yet few realize. Capital increases much faster than labor wages. Of course Biden did absolutely nothing about it. What does matter though is that the poorest 10% just haven’t got much of a way to escape poverty, and that should be easy to solve. Most Americans just say to ‘get a job’, without comprehending what the challenges are. Keeping illegal aliens out should create a few more jobs at labor ready when the supply of under the table labor dries up.of

Regardless of the distribution of wealth inequality it should be a national priority to relieve the most poor 10% of the population from dire poverty. There will always be those that cannot get hired to a decent job for myriad reasons; ugly, uneducated, ex-felon, persecuted, old, sickly etc. It is cruel in the rich modern economy where the median income of the bottom 50% is $51,000 per household to not relieve the most poor. Fifty thousand is itself a different social class than those living on fewer than annually $10,000. 

It should be made impossible for any American to have less than $10,000 annually to live on. If the most poor were relieved the nation would be a more decent society with the most cruel and even sadistic aspects of capitalism expunged. Palaver about redistribution and communism for tax increases on the rich could be allowed to fade. If the majority don't mind having just 2.6% of the wealth that would be their concern. The most poor just never appear on the political radar screen of anyone in politics.

Sanction Europe on LNG Until It Ends Hostilities With Russia

Joe Biden has done everything he can to stop President Trump from bringing an end to the Ukraine-Russia war. He has arranged for war to continue through the next Presidential election in 2028 if possible. N.A.T.O. members will take up the slack if Trump stops sending weapons to Ukraine.

One shouldn't underestimate Europe's will to make self-destructive political choices; they are idiots rather than peace makers or pragmatists  As at the end of WW 2 the USA will need to take the retards under it's armpit and lead it to prosperity and health while the mutt resists the bath.

Old Europe and N.A.T.O. is composed of numerous small, formerly imperial nations that sought global colonies. After Bill Clinton it began to expand in number growing to become somewhat of a monster in size. It is as if dozens of Chihuahuas could unite to become a big dog with the fierceness of a chihuahua. The dog yet has multiple personalities; some in paranoia, some with imperial ambition, and has become a potential threat to the United States directly and indirectly.  perpetrating further conflict with Russia may incite World War Three. Joe Biden has trained N.A.T.O. to expect the U.S.A. to be Europe's bimbo/lesbo enforcer doing its bidding. Americans in the media would go along with further war against Russia until the world is incinerated so they could appear to be patriotic in sycophancy with imperial ambitions.

   President Trump will need to negotiate with Europe simultaneously with Russia and Ukraine to stop the war. N.A.T.O. will seek to create a Gulf of Tonkin Resolution circumstance to force a full N.A.T.O. attack including the U.S.A. on Russia before a peace settlement is made. Peace should be a 50-50 value division of Ukraine with Russia, an end to tariffs and sanctions on both countries and reconstruction of Ukraine paid for by England, France and Germany.

  There should be a tax free DMZ along the shared border that is five miles wide to encourage trade and catalyze reconstruction. Sanctions should be placed on N.A.T.O.embers in Europe so they don’t receive U.S. fuel supplies or natural gas until they end hostilities with Russia. The world needs peace now and a recovering economy morphing into environmental economy for a more verdant planet.

Unscientific Generalities on the Etiology of Religion

 I am very cool on archetypes of collective subconsciousness such as Jung developed as a theory. The concept of projections is equally dubious today. As applied to God it conflates history at a massive scale positing a common cause for events and ideas that are mostly lost from history. One tribe may have had a different reason for beginning an idea than another. In the case of Abraham, that wasn't a collective experience. It was an individual, personal encounter. David Rosenberg wrote a biography for Abraham that is a very interesting read.

 https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/502016.Abraham

The Tower was one of Jung’s archetypes as well as a novel by Stephen King. People today ought to be able to sort out their ideas about reality and know what they think about particular aspects of it. There is a tendency toward postulating a common explanation without much basis for a panoply of events that are selected and lumped together. Conscious ideas about reality differ from those of the subconscious and tend to arise from experience and education.  There is a field of study called the history of ideas. Generally they require pretty good support for the origin of ideas in order not to be myths themselves.

Consider the Japanese Shinto religion for example. Where did the idea of Tori-spirit gates arise? I don’t know. Here is a good mythical account though that differs from some sort of common human projection…

A warlord made an heroic last stand in the gate of a wooden fortress on fire. His clan saw his dedication to defeating the overwhelming power of the enemy, yet at last, overcome by wounds he fell to his knees and was then beheaded. His forces were being driven back at the sight of their fallen leader. Just then a great eagle descended from the sky amidst the battle landing atop the gate and the warriors of the fallen hero knew the spirit of the warlord had returned. They rallied and drove back the enemy to the sea. Thereafter the spirit gate was recognized as a place where the spirits of the dead returned to help those still living in the world.

Pagan religion may have each had a different origin. In some cases kings simply declared themselves to be a god. Jews, Christians and Muslims share a common origin of their faith through Abraham and successors that wasn’t a projection of consciousness comparable to the origin of polytheists and numerous other belief systems. It is easy to construct a generality as an explanation for the unknown, yet unscientific.

Deficiencies In A.I. Text to Speech Reading for Ads

 For a while at least people will be able to discern the differences between A.I. readers of internet advertisements and stories with those of humans. Human tend to make some speech errors that differ from those of A.I. A.I. may pronounce ‘minerals’ ‘minurals’ as in manure for example, while a human if intentionally mispronouncing a a word would tend use a popular demotic political or innuendo spin replacement.

Lost to history are human pronunciations of ‘program’, ‘progrum’. It would be laughable if an A.I. said progrum.

With the rise of robots sales replacement workers in corporate jobs will accelerate. One can imagine Amazon using lots of robots to replace humans. I once looked for labor work in Phoenix years ago and would stand in a long line at labor ready hoping to get hired to no avail. Same story in Albuquerque.

The only jobs illegal aliens didn’t take were regular corporate jobs where illegals can’t be hired because the penalties would be too great for regular corporations to take the risk. All of the ad hoc jobs for working at Democrat owned homes were filled by illegal aliens. Robots will make it even more difficult to find work. No point in riding a bike to Apache Junction at 3 in the morning to find work with labor ready because there isn't any. Well, I did get four hours work at a Home Depot in Phoenix putting up shelves.

So Americans may tend to learn A.I. accented speech since that is what they are increasingly listening too. There are numerous A.I. text reader services available at the Google Play Store and elsewhere that do a very credible job of reading text. Business making advertisements use it a lot since it’s far cheaper than human actor-readers.

I like those Facebook stories with a photo perhaps generated by AI of a brown bear supplicant to a human for help removing a bear trap from a paw, or to follow it into the woods to rescue a cub from a well. One need write a decent story and A.I. will read the engaging story of human compassionate binding with a troubled wild animal that often becomes a friend for life and returns to visit annually. Many of them use the same A.I. reader. I had thought about having A.I. generate a photo of a troubled bear that had grown pig’s wings because of an evil scientist’s experiment cooking pharmaceuticals in a dark forest on innocent animal vectors that escaped to plea with the first human they found who happened to have parachuted in a halo jump to make it to a polling place, yet the project didn’t work out. I was limited to about 3 minutes reading with the free version of the A.I. reader. The flying bear epic never got off the ground.

I probably should wait until A.I. makes a lot of non-standard regional accents available, or talks in Tlingit language, before I try to make any fiction video short stories.

Saved by Faith, Not Works

Calvinists believe one is saved through faith alone (sola fide). Yet believe that if one is saved they shall do good works. Some say that if one doesn't show good works then they probably weren't saved. Calvinists believe scripture including that of James. The brother of Jesus said in chapter 2:"

14 "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?" 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,

16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?"

Though Christians are saved through faith, they have an avocation in the world. Paul wrote in Ephesians 2:10 ""For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them".

 Even good works are the result of grace