Evolution, Artificial Intelligence and “Oneness with G-d”

[Traveler]

I am confused about you talking about this life or the next. You seem to be bouncing back and forth between the two. I think you have to keep in mind that the "most effective and efficient solutions for the hive" don't have to "evolve" in the next life. They have already been worked out. They just have to be followed. (Thus, my example of the football player who simply follows the plan without any autonomous thought)

You seem to be implying that there has to be some form of change in the way things are done in the next life over time, which is what the words evolve implies. I don't think that is a feature of the next life. The process has been done over and over again, and all the bugs (excuse the pun - hives/bugs) have been worked out. The only place in which the lack of efficiency would need to be worked out is in a place where all the players are not on the same page, i.e. - in mortality. This is why I am saying (which you are taking as a given that does not really exist in this life) that the most important feature of this mentality is everyone being on the same page, the same motives and without variability or lack of integrity. The lack of integrity is the reason the football player would run a different route than planned, a mortal feature.

In reality I see only two intelligent reasons for two autonomous individuals refusing to ever work together. The first is that they lack the intelligence to do so - or second they both intelligently determine that it is to neither's advantage to do so.

Now the problem I have with the second reason is that as I contemplate that possibility it seems to be to be an oxymoron based on a lack of intelligence of one or both of the participants - Thus it seems to me the only reason that the hive mentality is not functioning is because it has broken down because of the stupidity of one or more of the autonomous participants.

Now if an ant colony can figure out how to get along for the benefit of all with the intelligence of insects what does that say about human families? It is interesting to me that the word "kind" has the same root as "kin" or family. Thus the understanding of being kind evolved from treating "others" as if they were part of "The Family". But some families are so messed up they would be better off treating their family members as strangers.

Somewhere in our effort to be an individual we have forgotten how to take advantage of working together - which could only happen to the intelligently handicapped?

The Traveler

[Vort]

In reality I see only two intelligent reasons for two autonomous individuals refusing to ever work together. The first is that they lack the intelligence to do so - or second they both intelligently determine that it is to neither's advantage to do so.

This is clearly untrue. If it is to my advantage to work with you, but to your great disadvantage to work with me, then in most cases you would be a fool to work with me.

[Traveler]

This is clearly untrue. If it is to my advantage to work with you, but to your great disadvantage to work with me, then in most cases you would be a fool to work with me.

Only if, in reality, is your statement "true" if you really are not working with me. Then is your statement proven to be untrue. Every model - even in artificial intelligence I have studied proves this to be the case. Can you give me a viable possible example? Let us discuss it - I am interested in your line of thinking. Perhaps there is something I am not considering.

The Traveler

[Vort]

Only if, in reality, is your statement "true" if you really are not working with me. Then is your statement proven to be untrue. Every model - even in artificial intelligence I have studied proves this to be the case. Can you give me a viable possible example? Let us discuss it - I am interested in your line of thinking. Perhaps there is something I am not considering.

Sure. Mr. A is a highly successful politician and philanthropist. Mr. Z is a convicted rapist and an avowed neo-Nazi. Mr. Z wishes to exploit a relationship with Mr. A to market his new book. The advantage here is all to Mr. Z, and the disadvantage all to Mr. A. In this example, Mr. A would be a fool indeed to work with Mr. Z, however much Mr. Z might benefit.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Now if an ant colony can figure out how to get along for the benefit of all with the intelligence of insects what does that say about human families?

The Traveler

Evolution does not equate with better. I think that is one mistake of science. Maybe it is because our "intelligence" also includes the ability and capacity for selfishness and for spontaneous imaginative and creative thought. With those two things a group that was working together can spontaneously change motives and decide that they don't like the nature of the relationship anymore or they want to get paid more or they think the other person isn't doing their job etc.. This is why I think in the hive mentality, as it applies to humans and maybe because of the "evolved" intelligence, there has to be some expenditure towards maintaining motive.

The natural man is an enemy to God. Likewise, "natural" evolution may not be something that takes us closer to God. Becoming more specialized in carnal activities may be more distant from spiritual ones or may be more distant from the original creation. I doubt the natural course of carnal things is one that reaches ever closer to God. Things that make us more efficient and "better" require effort and usually constant effort, otherwise natural man takes over and we slip down the hill in the opposite direction. Hanging our hat on some idea that we are more "evolved" at carnal activities may not be a good thing to be so proud of or at least try to improve further. I think getting away from our carnal nature is better.

[Traveler]

Sure. Mr. A is a highly successful politician and philanthropist. Mr. Z is a convicted rapist and an avowed neo-Nazi. Mr. Z wishes to exploit a relationship with Mr. A to market his new book. The advantage here is all to Mr. Z, and the disadvantage all to Mr. A. In this example, Mr. A would be a fool indeed to work with Mr. Z, however much Mr. Z might benefit.

I see. I am not sure you understand the hive mind. You are trying to create a scenario where Mr. A cannot obtain information or useful "intelligence" from Mr. Z. That is a matter of interpretation. In essence you are creating a parasitic relationship between Mr. Z and Mr. A. As soon as that relationship is exploited for the benefit of Mr. Z and determent of Mr. A and that information spreads throughout the hive mind (network) - the future of Mr. Z on in the network will become far less successful and thus quite harmful to Mr.Z. In fact Mr. A and the entire rest of the hive will respond as soon as the parasitic relationship becomes apparent. That will leave Mr. Z not only on his own moving forward but he would also have to deal with the all others with whom Mr. A has formed symbolic relationships of mutual benefit returning the behavior of Mr. Z in kind - knowing Mr. Z's parasitic methods of exploration. Mr. Z would be much better off avoiding the hive mind.

The Traveler

[Vort]

I see. I am not sure you understand the hive mind.

You are correct that I know little about the "hive mind", including whether such a thing even exists (I seriously doubt it). But I was responding directly to your assertion:

In reality I see only two intelligent reasons for two autonomous individuals refusing to ever work together. The first is that they lack the intelligence to do so - or second they both intelligently determine that it is to neither's advantage to do so.

Here you were speaking of "autonomous individuals", not of a "hive mind". I agree with your characterization of the example relationship as "parasitic". Such parasitic relationships are common between autonomous and reasonably intelligent individuals, where it is beneficial to one party and detrimental to the other.

[Traveler]

You are correct that I know little about the "hive mind", including whether such a thing even exists (I seriously doubt it). But I was responding directly to your assertion:

Here you were speaking of "autonomous individuals", not of a "hive mind". I agree with your characterization of the example relationship as "parasitic". Such parasitic relationships are common between autonomous and reasonably intelligent individuals, where it is beneficial to one party and detrimental to the other.

I am saying the advantage is to work together. If we assume the Mr. A and Mr. Z are the only two autonomous individuals that exist on earth - I still submit that it would be more intelligent for them to work together and if they cannot - it would because one or both is not intelligent to realize the advantage.

If they cannot learn to work together intelligently - they cannot evolve for the benefit of either. I think you are not focused on the necessity for intelligence.

The Traveler

Edited November 13, 2012 by Traveler

[Vort]

I am saying the advantage is to work together. If we assume the Mr. A and Mr. Z are the only two autonomous individuals that exist on earth - I still submit that it would be more intelligent for them to work together and if they cannot - it would because one or both is not intelligent to realize the advantage.

But they are not the only two people on earth. That's the point. It is disadvantageous for Mr. A and advantageous for Mr. Z. There is no obvious advantage to A in working together. It's all pain and misery for A.

Note that this is our position relative to Christ. There is no immediate benefit to him, and all benefit to us. But he loves us, and thus he sacrifices himself for us. We are to do the same. Nevertheless, I still maintain that your conclusion that the only reasonable thing for intelligent people to do is either to work together or avoid each other. I think it's quite common for a relationship to be beneficial to one party and harmful to the other.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Only if, in reality, is your statement "true" if you really are not working with me. Then is your statement proven to be untrue. Every model - even in artificial intelligence I have studied proves this to be the case. Can you give me a viable possible example? Let us discuss it - I am interested in your line of thinking. Perhaps there is something I am not considering.

The Traveler

What about the example of the United States of America, hope you are not questioning the intelligence of the signers of the Declaration of Independence; "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

[Traveler]

I am going to have to concede the point where certain efforts of corporation are undesirable but with a caveat. The caveat has to do with the understanding and definition of corporation and undesirable. The notion that corporation can produce one sided benefit is contrary to the incentive of the hive mind intelligence that must foster “mutual” benefit that in all cases must exceed individual undesirability.

I have played the suggested scenarios through various artificial intelligence models and the result is always the same. When one individual intends to take advantage of another individual; the long term benefits will not guarantee better than independent benefit especially when the benefits are competing – meaning that only one entity can benefit and of necessity the other must suffer a loss of benefit.

But there are problems – what about the sacrifice of the individual for the mutual benefit of the whole? In addition where do we draw the line between individuals “judging” others or not forgiving others in the expanded LDS understanding of the plan of salvation.

There seems to be two possibilities within the concept of the hive mind intelligence. In essence the possibilities are success and failure. It would play into success when the hive mind is comprised of all autonomous individuals working together for the best possible benefits. The opposite is when one or more autonomous individuals is dedicated to the best possible individual benefit. This is in essence the scenario some posters question. It appears that the best solution would be for the hive mind to excommunicate the adverse elements. It is interesting to me that this is exactly the solution proposed by G-d in the plan of salvation.

This has caused me to rethink my understanding and position that at the final judgment every individual will select their “Kingdom” and no one will be forced out or punished. However, it is possible that individuals will seek benefit to exploit the hive intelligence of highly advanced and “righteous” cooperating societies. Those elements of necessity must be excommunicated or removed in order for the hive mind to reach best possible results for autonomous individuals willing to cooperate for the “best” possible benefit. I had thought there would be an more “natural” selection but such is not always the case – I want to thank those that have diligently opposed some of my thoughts in this regard (mainly Vort and Seminarysnoozer and others that will unintentionally remain unnamed)

The Traveler

[Seminarysnoozer]

I am going to have to concede the point where certain efforts of corporation are undesirable but with a caveat. The caveat has to do with the understanding and definition of corporation and undesirable. The notion that corporation can produce one sided benefit is contrary to the incentive of the hive mind intelligence that must foster “mutual” benefit that in all cases must exceed individual undesirability.

I have played the suggested scenarios through various artificial intelligence models and the result is always the same. When one individual intends to take advantage of another individual; the long term benefits will not guarantee better than independent benefit especially when the benefits are competing – meaning that only one entity can benefit and of necessity the other must suffer a loss of benefit.

But there are problems – what about the sacrifice of the individual for the mutual benefit of the whole? In addition where do we draw the line between individuals “judging” others or not forgiving others in the expanded LDS understanding of the plan of salvation.

There seems to be two possibilities within the concept of the hive mind intelligence. In essence the possibilities are success and failure. It would play into success when the hive mind is comprised of all autonomous individuals working together for the best possible benefits. The opposite is when one or more autonomous individuals is dedicated to the best possible individual benefit. This is in essence the scenario some posters question. It appears that the best solution would be for the hive mind to excommunicate the adverse elements. It is interesting to me that this is exactly the solution proposed by G-d in the plan of salvation.

This has caused me to rethink my understanding and position that at the final judgment every individual will select their “Kingdom” and no one will be forced out or punished. However, it is possible that individuals will seek benefit to exploit the hive intelligence of highly advanced and “righteous” cooperating societies. Those elements of necessity must be excommunicated or removed in order for the hive mind to reach best possible results for autonomous individuals willing to cooperate for the “best” possible benefit. I had thought there would be an more “natural” selection but such is not always the case – I want to thank those that have diligently opposed some of my thoughts in this regard (mainly Vort and Seminarysnoozer and others that will unintentionally remain unnamed)

The Traveler

Thank you, as always, for stimulating conversation.

[Guest Thinker]

... Is there logic in G-d establishing a kind of symbiotic relationship (oneness) with man? If there is any indication in the patterns (fractals) of living things that are intelligent – the answer is yes. And there is a benefit to G-d as there is to any living thing; to cooperate with other living things. Interesting that G-d calls himself the living G-d. This principle plays directly into the LDS concept of eternal progression. And until now I had not really captured the logic of it all.

The Traveler

I love it!

Very deep.

I think it is exciting and motivating to realize deeper interpretations of gospel ideas.

[Traveler]

The more I delve into and drill down into thought of a hive mind the more interesting it becomes to me. We need to realize that the definition and concept of the hive mind is being precipitated and driven by social media - especially hand held devices. There is an advertisement for something I do not remember but the story line is about a couple sitting across from each other at a speed dating event. Every line (thing) the guy is saying the girl is finding something in his face book that demonstrates he is not sincere. He then makes one last desperate attempt to impress the girl and she finds that it is posted on his face book account as his favorite pickup line. The skit ends with him regretting posting anything.

One of my sons in law is a prosecutor and tells me that many criminals are giving up and not even going to court because the police have found confessions on the face book account. I waiting for another Muranda Rights to try to nullify such confessions but lawyers tell me that because the internet is public and not private what someone posts on the internet can be quite incriminating.

I am intrigued by the idea that PDA, smart phones and other hand held devices is changing social behaviors as well as the way information is obtained.

With all this in mind now let’s look at some scriptures. Revelation 2:17

• He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Now look at Doctrine and Covenants 130:10-11

• 10 Then the white stone mentioned in Revelation 2:17, will become a Urim and Thummim to each individual who receives one, whereby things pertaining to a higher order of kingdoms will be made known;
• 11 And a white stone is given to each of those who come into the celestial kingdom, whereon is a new name written, which no man knoweth save he that receiveth it. The new name is the key word.

Is it not interesting that the white stone (Urim and Thummim) appear to have similarities to a PDS or smart phone? My oh my - don’t we live in a most interesting age and time?

The Traveler