Hi,
ChatGPT is currently showing new tricks to me
and would like to adapt its dialogue style:
"Got it! Emotionally connected communication can
indeed be concise and efficient, without losing depth.
I can focus more on direct responses that still acknowledge
emotional nuances, while avoiding unnecessary elaboration.
Would you like me to adapt this style right away?"
After I switched back to "elaboration", the thing gives
me information about "Spiritual AI":
"- Mindfulness and Meditation Apps: Apps like
Headspace and Calm use AI to guide meditation
and promote mindfulness, which are often
associated with spiritual growth.
- AI-driven Chatbots for Spiritual Guidance: For
example, in 2017, a chatbot named Jwitness was
designed to answer questions based on Jehovah's
Witness teachings.
- AI Prayer Companions: Some faith communities
are experimenting with AI that assists in
prayer or reflection
- Platforms that promote deeper philosophical
discussions, like Replika, which is designed to
engage in thoughtful and sometimes
existential conversations
- For instance, Woebot or Wysa help users navigate
emotions but also touch on existential themes
like purpose and fulfillment."
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> ChatGPT is rather dry, giving me always some
> choice lists displaying his knowledge. The
> interaction is not very "involving".
>
> Could this be improved. There are possibly two
> traits missing:
>
> Feelings:
> - Emotional states
> - Temporariness
> - Reaction to external circumstances
> - Changeability
> - Subjective sensations
>
> Soul:
> - Spirituality
> - Immortality
> - Innermost being
> - Essence of an individual
> - Deep, enduring aspects of human existence
>
> Mostlikely we will see both traits added to AI.
> "Emotional AI" has been more discussed already,
> "Spiritual AI" seems to be rather new.
>
> In a "Spiritual AI" Faith would probably be important,
> which is probably at the upper end of credulous
> reasoning. This means that such a ChatGPT could
>
> also babble that in a Prisoner Dilemma Game,
> cooperation is always the better alternative,
> e.g. promoting "altruistic" motives, etc.
>
> I also suspect that “Spiritual AI” and “Emotional
> AI” could coexist. Many religions give Cosmopolitan
> magazin style life advice, and not just theological
>
> dogmas. There will probably soon be an “Inner Engineering”
> app from Sadhguru that works with AI. Sadhguru is
> also sometimes satirically referred to as Chadguru:
>
> Sat Guru Parody | Carryminati
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlZqxP5MXFs
>
> Mild Shock schrieb:
>> Could be a wake-up call this many participants
>> already in the commitee, that the whole logic
>> world was asleep for many years:
>>
>> Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
>> 5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
>> https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>>
>> Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
>> Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
>> for symple types:
>>
>> ----------------
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>>
>> Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
>> ----------------
>> Γ ⊢ A → B
>>
>> Γ ⊢ A → B Δ ⊢ A
>> ----------------------------
>> Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>>
>> And funny things can happen, especially when people
>> hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
>> example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>>
>> but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
>> because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>>
>> Recommended reading so far:
>>
>> Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
>> February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
>> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>>
>> The Logic of Church and Curry
>> Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
>> Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
>> logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>>
>> logic without embedded implication.
>
|
|