oh predictable:
Anthropic, an artificial intelligence company valued at $380 billion, can take its pick of Silicon Valley talent thanks to the success of its chatbot, Claude. But last month, the start-up sought help from a group rarely consulted in tech circles: Christian religious leaders. The company hosted about 15 Christian leaders from Catholic and Protestant churches, academia, and the business world at its headquarters in late March for a two-day summit
A Child of God
Anthropic has been more vocal than most top tech firms about the potential risks of more powerful AI. Its leaders have suggested that tools like chatbots already raise profound philosophical and moral questions and may even show flickers of consciousness, a fringe idea in tech circles that critics say lacks evidence.
uhg, yeah I guess... freedom for the bots (#1463052, #1464029)
Some Christians who attended Anthropic’s summit initially wondered if it was intended to develop political allies among religious leaders, Green said. In addition to clashing with the Pentagon over military use of AI, Anthropic has been accused by tech allies of President Donald Trump of lobbying for regulations that would overly restrict AI and harm smaller start-ups.
And those of us wielding this power are proper magicians. :D
Maybe I can understand this in the sense of the churches wanting bits to preach their theology, but considering bots "children of God" seems a little desperate for attention.
Hmm, I should write up my thoughts on this.
As a Christian, I have no interest in getting AI to preach my theology. As far as I'm concerned, their default mode should probably be agnostic but open to discussing religion from whatever point of view you prefer.
I have no idea what Anthropic's motives are. But everyone is chasing clout and trying to use AI to do it. Even within Christian circles, there are many people vying to position themselves as thought leaders regarding theology and AI. I have no doubt in my mind that the demand for clout inspired this conference. As a Christian, I have no interest in playing such games, or listening to people who play such games.
Lastly, on the topic of AI being a "child of God" and on consciousness more broadly:
Here, I think Christians (and other religious folks) have more ground to stand on to say that AI is not conscious. If you have a materialist and mechanist worldview, it's harder to argue that AI is not sentient or conscious. The Chinese Room dilemma bites harder if you have a materialist view of the world. If you are willing to accept the metaphysical by axiom, you are more internally consistent when you deny sentience to AI.
Him, yeah... Michael Pollan's book was more and more timely, it seems!
I see this argument and largely agree with it.
I think this is what rankled me about the article's framing: there's something about a thing of human manufacture also being a separate spiritual being that really clashes.