On Angels, Demons, Sins, and Slightly Less Scary Chatbots
Let's talk about something terrifying: artificial intelligence.
No, I'm not talking about robots with laser eyes (though, let's be honest, that would be pretty cool).
I'm talking about the chatbots, the algorithms, the digital whiz-bangery that's got everyone from your grandma to Elon Musk in a tizzy.
It's like the new millennium's version of worrying about the Y2K bug, except instead of fearing a global computer meltdown, we're worried about our toasters becoming sentient and demanding better bread.
Now, to understand this whole AI shebang, we need a good theory of mind.
Not like, "Oh, I think I'll have a ham sandwich" mind, but a proper, philosophical, "what even is thinking?" kind of mind.
And where better to look for that than… angels and demons?
Yes, you heard me right. Before you call for the men in white coats, hear me out.
 |
| Chatbots, Angels, Devils, and the Search for Real Thought |
I recently attended a philosophy seminar on the topic of angels and demons. Sounds like a heavy metal album, I know. But surprisingly, it was the perfect gateway to understanding AI. We delved into Thomas Aquinas's Summa Theologiae, specifically his treatise on angels.
Now, Aquinas wasn't just some guy with a beard and a quill; he was a brilliant mind who grappled with the very nature of intelligence. And by comparing angelic intelligence to human intelligence, we can get a better grasp on what AI isn't.
See, angels, according to Aquinas, are immaterial intelligences.
They don't have bodies, they don't need to Google stuff, they just know.
It's like having the entire internet downloaded directly into your brain, except without the annoying pop-up ads for online casinos.
This is where it gets interesting when we compare them to those super-smart chatbots.
Think of ChatGPT. You ask it a question, and boom, it spits out an answer faster than you can say "supercalifragilisticexpialidocious." It looks like it understands. It sounds like it understands. But does it really understand? Or is it just really good at mimicking understanding, like a parrot reciting Shakespeare without knowing what any of it means? (Though, to be fair, sometimes I feel like that when reading Shakespeare.)
This brings us to the crucial difference: discourse. When we think, we have a conversation with ourselves. We mull things over, we consider different angles, we sometimes even argue with ourselves (don't pretend you don't). This is discourse. Chatbots, on the other hand, don't do this. They process information and generate output, but there's no internal dialogue, no "hmm, maybe I should rephrase that."
It's like a vending machine: you put in the money (the question), and it spits out the product (the answer). There's no existential crisis involved.
 |
| From the Hell to Algorithms: Why a Calculator Can't Write a Love Poem |
Aquinas even argued that angels don't actually speak to humans in the traditional sense. They simulate speech so we can understand them.
This is strikingly similar to what LLMs do: they simulate language. They create a simulacrum of thought, a digital echo of human expression. It's like watching a really good impersonator; they might sound and look like the real deal, but they're not actually the person. They're just really good at pretending.
Now, some folks might argue, "But these chatbots are getting smarter every day! Soon they'll be indistinguishable from humans!" And that's where the computational model of mind comes in, the idea that thinking is just a series of calculations.
It's like saying a calculator is intelligent because it can do math. Sure, it can perform complex calculations faster than any human, but it doesn't understand math. It's just following instructions. It's like a highly trained dog doing tricks; impressive, but not exactly a philosophical awakening.
Aquinas offers an alternative: mindedness as freedom from material limitation.
This has two parts: intellect and will. Intellect is the capacity to understand the very nature of things, not just the surface level. It's like understanding the concept of "horseness" instead of just seeing individual horses.
Will is the capacity to direct our intellectual lives, to set our own goals. It's what separates us from programmed machines.
LLMs have neither of these. They don't grasp the world; they just manipulate our representations of it.
They don't have their own goals; they just follow the instructions they've been given.
They're like really sophisticated puppets, dancing to the tune of their programmers.
 |
| Thinking, Imitation, and the Great Chatbot Deception |
It's tempting to project intelligence onto these machines, especially because they're so good at mimicking human behavior. It's like looking at a really realistic painting of a cat and momentarily thinking it's real. But it's just an illusion. The painting is just pigments on canvas; it doesn't have fur or purr or demand to be fed at 3 AM.
The real danger here isn't that AI will become sentient and take over the world (though, again, laser-eyed robots would be pretty cool). The real danger is that we'll confuse the tool with the user, that we'll mistake imitation for genuine intelligence.
It's like confusing a cookbook with a chef; the cookbook might contain all the recipes, but it can't actually cook a meal.
So, what's the solution? We need a healthy dose of humanism.
We need to remember what makes us human: our capacity for genuine thought, our ability to set our own goals, our inherent need to argue about the meaning of life over a pint of beer.
We shouldn't be afraid of technology, but we shouldn't be blinded by it either. We need to use it wisely, to hold its creators accountable, and to remember that the most powerful tool we have is still our own minds.
Because, let's face it, if our toasters did become sentient, they'd probably just complain about the quality of the bread anyway. And who needs that kind of negativity first thing in the morning?
 |
| Is ChatGPT an Angel in Disguise? |
The nature of intelligence by comparing human and artificial intelligence to the concept of angelic intelligence as described by Thomas Aquinas. It examines the limitations of current AI, particularly large language models, arguing that they lack genuine understanding and will. The examples explain complex philosophical concepts, ultimately advocating for a renewed focus on humanism in the face of rapid technological advancements.
#AI #ArtificialIntelligence #Philosophy #ThomasAquinas #Angels #Demons #Mind #Consciousness #Chatbots #LLMs #LanguageModels #Technology #Humanism #DigitalAge #Ethics #FutureOfAI #Intelligence #Thinking #Cognition #Computers #DataCenters #DigitalGhosts