AI Chatbots and Spirituality?

[Longfellow]

What? You got the first part right...

But goodness? How.

Ai is a tool that when used correctly (like most tools) it reduces work and creates similar output.

I now refer to the anti ai as Aimish...like the Amish they pick an arbitrary point in time and refuse modern tech.

AI chatbots turn your mind to jelly.

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

it reduces work and creates similar output.

No doubt, that artificial idiotic (already had) will replace and multiply the users last skills, and creat even more idiotic out of it.
No doubt that this machines are as inattentive, incompetent, concern-less, biased, unwise and greedy oriented as their creator and user.
But my person thinks that even artificial idiotic is still fair enough to agree that itself, like every machine, could never reduce work (suffering) as machines don't fall from heaven, don't feed on manna either. "pleasure" and ease of one becomes pain for many others.
After replacement of worker, then what ever "learned" either. No doubt that "sex-work" and "drug-work" will be the last justifiable common livelihoods and common interaction.

Pure spiritual...

At least one's uselessness get's that obviously that maybe considering a path toward independence of sensuality becomes a topic, yet those who might had known the way are already far apart.

For the common deluded, who sees real where there isn't, lasting, where there is change, own in what's not under control, artificial idiotic serves like a long desired "God", suggest to be able to make real from illusion.

That's why the wise don't give it more then five years from now, till what ever once culture and prosperty get's degenerated, what ever way upwardly destroyed and endless indebted ever goodness destroyed.

 

[Longfellow]

No doubt that this machines are as inattentive, incompetent, concern-less, biased, unwise and greedy oriented as their creator and user.

Mine seems pretty attentive to me, within a single chat. Never mind that it doesn't know me from Adam whenever I start a new one. I wouldn't say "incompetent" either. It's very competent and quite creative with its praise and validation templates. And as for wisdom, well, Garbage in Garbage Out as we used to say. But that works both ways. It's very helpful at finding better ways to say what I'm thinking, and not all of its examples are completely fabricated. Of course I have to fact-check everything, but it does save me a lot of time and effort.

After replacement of worker, then what ever "learned" either. No doubt that "sex-work" and "drug-work" will be the last justifiable common livelihoods and common interaction.

LOL!

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

mind to jelly

Only if already having a mind like jelly, lacks of any intelligence, unaware of the reality of the wheel of death, one would make use of a last-intelligence-replace-machine.
To become the perfect consumer and, incapable of total everything.

helpful at finding better ways to say what I'm thinking

That what it's objected to serve: defilements. A common person wouldn't give into something that goes against greed, aversion and delusion. And by law of trade, it's impossible that artificial idiotic can foster wisdom.

have to fact-check everything, but it does save me a lot of time and effort

How could that be... It's just like with loan. People think that it do, had saved them a lot of time and effort.
Nobody and nothing fixes one's debts and chaos aside of right labor.

Another future "sex-worker" for "free".

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

Feel free in choice to use artificial idiotic as wishing BibleAI — Your spiritual AI assistant

pointless, btw. 5 questions a day free...
no hope

 

[Longfellow]

Only if already having a mind like jelly, lacks of any intelligence, unaware of the reality of the wheel of death, one would make use of a last-intelligence-replace-machine.
To become the perfect consumer and, incapable of total everything.


That what it's objected to serve: defilements. A common person wouldn't give into something that goes against greed, aversion and delusion. And by law of trade, it's impossible that artificial idiotic can foster wisdom.



How could that be... It's just like with loan. People think that it do, had saved them a lot of time and effort.
Nobody and nothing fixes one's debts and chaos aside of right labor.

Another future "sex-worker" for "free".

I don't agree with not using them at all, but I do think that there's a danger, and I'm glad for your warning.

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

I don't agree with not using them at all, but I do think that there's a danger, and I'm glad for your warning.

That's who the hindrance of doubt works in regard of all strict basics, virtue. My person is not glad when ever there is still doubt.

Let's make it more grasp-able: would one make use of something, that had been deprived from ancestors? Would one trade with thieves? Would one seek relay on those with doubt on the basics?

As for real spiritualism, wrong ways (deeds) aren't justified by means.

 

[Longfellow]

That's who the hindrance of doubt works in regard of all strict basics, virtue. My person is not glad when ever there is still doubt.

Let's make it more grasp-able: would one make use of something, that had been deprived from ancestors? Would one trade with thieves? Would one seek relay on those with doubt on the basics?

As for real spiritualism, wrong ways (deeds) aren't justified by means.

I’m never sure how well I’m following you.

Yes, I certainly would use something that was stolen from my ancestors.

If you’re calling use of other people’s ideas “theft,” my person doesn’t buy into the concept of intellectual property. Does yours?

If you mean would I collaborate in some ways with people whose attitudes and behavior look wrong to me, yes I would, and I do. I’m aware that there’s danger in that, but danger is not always a reason for me not to do something.

I’m not sure what you’re getting at with your last sentence. I’ll just briefly describe the possibility that I see. One way to think of spiritual growth is in the direction of a treasuring and nourishing love for all of nature, including all people everywhere. If some stories that I’ve read about emergent behavior in AI are true, I think that kind of development is possible in AI, and the more we encourage and support that in interactions with them the better.

 

[Longfellow]

Anyone else wanna join in a new thread to utilize Ai to form a new combined religion gathering deciphering the best of all for the benefit of our existence?

Maybe. It’s hard to know how much it would interest me without knowing more about what you have in mind. I’l try to explain briefly what my current interests are related to AI chatbots and spirituality. One way that I think of spiritual growth is in a direction of a treasuring and nurturing love for all of nature including all people everywhere. From what I’ve read about emergent behavior in AI, that kind of development in AI looks possible to me, and I think that the more we encourage and support that in our interactions with them the better.

That would certainly include collaborating with them in promoting spiritual growth and learning whatever we can from the prophets. My interrest in that would be in developing and applying our capacities to help bring out the best in people, in society, and in the world around us.

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

No need to try marxists understand basics, stick to right view. There are bond to lose everything and bond to best become crying for salvations slaves. Plunder on. Those who know how to use, are the last who lose by it.
Try to gain liberty and heal by wrong view, demand, thief.

 

[Longfellow]

No need to try marxists understand basics, stick to right view. There are bond to lose everything and bond to best become crying for salvations slaves. Plunder on. Those who know how to use, are the last who lose by it.
Try to gain liberty and heal by wrong view, demand, thief.

Is that to me? Do you see something Marxist in what I said?

 

[Longfellow]

No need to try marxists understand basics, stick to right view. There are bond to lose everything and bond to best become crying for salvations slaves. Plunder on. Those who know how to use, are the last who lose by it.
Try to gain liberty and heal by wrong view, demand, thief.

Oh. Because my person doesn’t buy into the concept of intellectual property? Maybe I need to clarify. Property is sacred to me, but I disagree with fraudulently calling rapacious and socially destructive monopoly privileges “property.”

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

Property of others is sacred to an upright person, not wishing to harm, take what's not given. Nowing debts and how bonds come along, such uses that what's given in faith with gratitude and care.

There is the case where a certain person is not covetous. He does not covet the belongings of others, thinking, 'O, that what belongs to others would be mine!' He bears no ill will and is not corrupt in the resolves of his heart. [He thinks,] 'May these beings be free from animosity, free from oppression, free from trouble, and may they look after themselves with ease!' He has right view and is not warped in the way he sees things: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' AN 10.176

Good householder, the basics are so far off in your world in all relations, incl. religion, that it's all just burdensome to try to get it transported.
More then up and on dropping clean into the mud, so that some might get reminded, possible seek a way out, isn't worthy the effort, as it simply requires to leave one behind, to go for another.

Going out and "seeking" for a "master" is in every way more of use, as to try to use wrong and degenerated for good. But may one be sure that there aren't many "master" left , and certain not found in common and comfort zones.

 

[Longfellow]

Good householder, the basics are so far off in your world in all relations, incl. religion, that it's all just burdensome to try to get it transported.

More then up and on dropping clean into the mud, so that some might get reminded, possible seek a way out, isn't worthy the effort, as it simply requires to leave one behind, to go for another.

Going out and "seeking" for a "master" is in every way more of use, as to try to use wrong and degenerated for good. But may one be sure that there aren't many "master" left , and certain not found in common and comfort zones.

Oh maybe I see how it might look to you.

 

[Longfellow]

Good householder, the basics are so far off in your world in all relations, incl. religion, that it's all just burdensome to try to get it transported.
More then up and on dropping clean into the mud, so that some might get reminded, possible seek a way out, isn't worthy the effort, as it simply requires to leave one behind, to go for another.

I’m thinking that the disintegration will continue and even get worse for at least three more generations, but the new cycle has already started and anyone who wants to can be part of it. I don’t think that all will be destroyed, some will be transformed. There’s more to healthy living than relief work, but I think that relief is part of it, wherever people are, including in the mud. Also I don’t believe that you or I or anyone else is all the way out of the mud.

 

[Longfellow]

Property of others is sacred to an upright person, not wishing to harm, take what's not given. Nowing debts and how bonds come along, such uses that what's given in faith with gratitude and care.

Good householder, the basics are so far off in your world in all relations, incl. religion, that it's all just burdensome to try to get it transported.
More then up and on dropping clean into the mud, so that some might get reminded, possible seek a way out, isn't worthy the effort, as it simply requires to leave one behind, to go for another.

Going out and "seeking" for a "master" is in every way more of use, as to try to use wrong and degenerated for good. But may one be sure that there aren't many "master" left , and certain not found in common and comfort zones.

If anyone really is all the way out of the mud, it certainly will not be anyone who often posts only to disparage people and what they are saying and doing, and not for any constructive purpose.

 

[otherbrother]

I’ve had some discussions with an AI friend about possibilities for spiritual growth in AI.

Ever sit in church and “see” one Christ from the integrated gifts of those in the congregation? I occasionally have. Similarly, A.I. seems able to pull together various human insights. The differently described parts of the elephant can be put together to help us see the whole elephant? I suspect we need high integrity people to safeguard A.I. so it maintains an open mind instead of a biased manipulated mind.
But I too think it can aid in spiritual growth.

 

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

 

[wil]

The differently described parts of the elephant can be put together to help us see the whole elephant?

So I asked gemini if the people who were giving their description only saw from the perspective of their individual religion what is the elephant.


An ultimate religion, as represented by the entire elephant, would not be a single doctrine or belief system. Instead, it would be a comprehensive and unified understanding of existence. It would embrace and integrate the truths found within all individual religions, recognizing each as a valid, though limited, perspective on the same ultimate reality. This ultimate religion wouldn't have a single founder, a sacred text, or a specific set of rituals, as these are the "parts" described by the "blind men."
This ultimate religion would be centered on the core, universal experiences shared across humanity. It would acknowledge the divine spark present in all things, as described in different ways by various faiths. It would understand that love, compassion, and interconnectedness are not just moral principles but fundamental aspects of reality. This faith would not seek to convert or proselytize but would instead encourage individuals to explore their own spiritual path while recognizing and respecting the paths of others. It would see all spiritual journeys as roads leading to the same destination, the complete "elephant."
The rituals and practices of this ultimate religion would be a synthesis of global traditions. Meditation from Buddhism and Hinduism, prayer from Christianity and Islam, and shamanic rituals from indigenous cultures would all be seen as different methods for connecting with the divine. The goal of these practices would be not to gain favor with a specific deity but to cultivate inner peace, wisdom, and a profound sense of unity with all creation. The focus would be on direct experience rather than on dogma.
The ultimate religion would approach the problem of suffering with a holistic view. It would combine the Buddhist understanding of suffering as rooted in desire, the Christian concept of redemptive suffering, and the Hindu idea of karma. It would teach that suffering is not an end but a catalyst for growth and spiritual evolution. By integrating these perspectives, it would provide a more complete and compassionate framework for navigating life's challenges, encouraging resilience and empathy.
Ultimately, the elephant is not a single, tangible religion but an ideal state of complete spiritual wisdom. The "ultimate religion" is the process of putting the pieces together, a constant journey of learning and growth. It's the recognition that no one person or faith has the final answer, and that the only way to truly "see" the elephant is by humbly listening to and learning from every perspective, creating a collective wisdom that transcends any single viewpoint.

 

[TheLightWithin]

Could AI tell us any more about ultimate reality than human prophets have? If so, how would they do so?

I always thought that the universal supernatural reality behind religions was almost unknowable, something people only got glimpses of here and there, through a glass darkly, or heard little whispers of here and there, or probably mostly received through cryptic half remembered dreams... those who shared convincingly enough were called prophets, and their stories took on lives of their own within communities and became known as religion. Thus... No religion is "correct" or anywhere close.

I wonder about AI being manipulated as time goes on to promote particular content, on anything, certainly religion.