LOL it figures Mara would like EVE for the guns.
Beautiful amirite?
WALL*E
Started by
Urvy
, Jun 27 2008 11:24 PM
59 replies to this topic
#21
cancel_me
-
- Senior Members
-
- 11,857 posts
Adorable Squeak Toy
- Gender:Female
Posted 03 July 2008 - 12:18 AM
#22
.:!Gwen!:.
-
- Members
-
- 10,830 posts
Listening to the song we used to sing...
Posted 04 July 2008 - 04:55 AM
I...didn't really like it.
I mean, it was OKAY and if someone asked me if they should see it, I'd say yeah, go ahead.
But I dunno.
The excuse I gave myself if even though Wall*E's really cute and naive and shy, and E.V.E. is freaking BADASS and beautiful to watch...the thing is...they're ROBOTS.
As to quote the Fairly Odd Parents, "Love does not compute. --head explodes--"
So I blame my semi-dislike of the movie on my left-brain dominance. That means everything has to be like, logical and laid out in steps for me to understand and approve. That's why I like math.
But anyway.
I can't understand artificial things having FEELING. Idk.
Logical thinking ruined it for me.
The moral was good and all. You know, Al Gore, "Go Green", "It's the only planet with chocolate", blah blah.
But my personal beliefs tell me that the Earth will never get that way. I'm not gonna expand on that unless you want to contact me personally, but whatever.
So yeah. I liked Monster's Inc. better. XD
.:!Gwen!:.
I mean, it was OKAY and if someone asked me if they should see it, I'd say yeah, go ahead.
But I dunno.
The excuse I gave myself if even though Wall*E's really cute and naive and shy, and E.V.E. is freaking BADASS and beautiful to watch...the thing is...they're ROBOTS.
As to quote the Fairly Odd Parents, "Love does not compute. --head explodes--"
So I blame my semi-dislike of the movie on my left-brain dominance. That means everything has to be like, logical and laid out in steps for me to understand and approve. That's why I like math.
But anyway.
I can't understand artificial things having FEELING. Idk.
Logical thinking ruined it for me.
The moral was good and all. You know, Al Gore, "Go Green", "It's the only planet with chocolate", blah blah.
But my personal beliefs tell me that the Earth will never get that way. I'm not gonna expand on that unless you want to contact me personally, but whatever.
So yeah. I liked Monster's Inc. better. XD
.:!Gwen!:.
#23
cancel_me
-
- Senior Members
-
- 11,857 posts
Adorable Squeak Toy
- Gender:Female
Posted 04 July 2008 - 07:05 AM
There's one thing I can agree with you about: I'm not too into robot love. I just don't get it. The same way I don't get animal love...
NO OFFENSE. I can only stand to watch two humans (MALE AND FEMALE KTHX VERY MUCH) interact romantically. I mean, it was CUTE and all but I'm not gonna go "BAAAAAAAW" over it.
Otherwise, I enjoyed the hinted moral in the story. I don't believe, if we change our actions, that Earth will end up that way. However, if we take no preventative methods then we are basically just asking for it. Haha.
NO OFFENSE. I can only stand to watch two humans (MALE AND FEMALE KTHX VERY MUCH) interact romantically. I mean, it was CUTE and all but I'm not gonna go "BAAAAAAAW" over it.
Otherwise, I enjoyed the hinted moral in the story. I don't believe, if we change our actions, that Earth will end up that way. However, if we take no preventative methods then we are basically just asking for it. Haha.
#24
Flank
-
- Senior Members
-
- 6,774 posts
Nothing is ever so simple
Posted 04 July 2008 - 08:49 AM
I haven't seen that movie, so no comments.
Gwen, Krista, I completely share your POV on love, but, this is just a fairy tale and should be taken like one. It's metaphorical.
Gwen, I think it would be interesting to hear, at least for me, what you are thinking about these issues.
Gwen, Krista, I completely share your POV on love, but, this is just a fairy tale and should be taken like one. It's metaphorical.
Gwen, I think it would be interesting to hear, at least for me, what you are thinking about these issues.
#25
.:!Gwen!:.
-
- Members
-
- 10,830 posts
Listening to the song we used to sing...
Posted 05 July 2008 - 02:24 AM
Well, I can stand animals more because animals can experience feelings. Robots can't.
But my Lord. The Auto-pilot thing = HAL, much? XD
@Flank: Being Christian, I'm sure you can figure out why I don't think the world will end up in such a state. But if you want me to expand, like I said, you can PM me. (:
.:!Gwen!:.
But my Lord. The Auto-pilot thing = HAL, much? XD
@Flank: Being Christian, I'm sure you can figure out why I don't think the world will end up in such a state. But if you want me to expand, like I said, you can PM me. (:
.:!Gwen!:.
#26
NekoGirl
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,243 posts
He's BACK & better than ever!! ^-^
- Gender:Female
Posted 05 July 2008 - 05:25 AM
Oh dear Lord, this was PRICELESS! :wub:
Let me just say this... WALL-E & EVE TOYS!! :D
I absolutely ADORED the couple, & they are my newest OTP, complete with wallpaper screenshot, & trying desprately to download the movie just till the DVD comes out & for screenshot purposes. ^_^
I thought the same as everyone else in this topic about the message Pixar tried to send, & they did it SO flawlessly its unbelievable. If this doesn't get more Sam Mansons & Maddie Fitzpatricks out into the world I don't know WHAT will! :D
The Presto short had the theater we went to laughing, even my mom cracked up half the time, & usually she's asleep by the end of my movies I want to see! :lol: She even liked the twosome a little too! THAT is a first, for sure. ^_^
So yeah, Wall-E & Eve FOREVER, 'nuff said! :D
Well okay, one more thing: if I EVER hear of a Wall-E 2? TICKETS THE SECOND THEIR FOR SELL & OPENING DAY, FIRST AIRING!! :kawaii:
Let me just say this... WALL-E & EVE TOYS!! :D
I absolutely ADORED the couple, & they are my newest OTP, complete with wallpaper screenshot, & trying desprately to download the movie just till the DVD comes out & for screenshot purposes. ^_^
I thought the same as everyone else in this topic about the message Pixar tried to send, & they did it SO flawlessly its unbelievable. If this doesn't get more Sam Mansons & Maddie Fitzpatricks out into the world I don't know WHAT will! :D
The Presto short had the theater we went to laughing, even my mom cracked up half the time, & usually she's asleep by the end of my movies I want to see! :lol: She even liked the twosome a little too! THAT is a first, for sure. ^_^
So yeah, Wall-E & Eve FOREVER, 'nuff said! :D
Well okay, one more thing: if I EVER hear of a Wall-E 2? TICKETS THE SECOND THEIR FOR SELL & OPENING DAY, FIRST AIRING!! :kawaii:
#27
cancel_me
-
- Senior Members
-
- 11,857 posts
Adorable Squeak Toy
- Gender:Female
Posted 05 July 2008 - 08:45 PM
Yeah, but Lion King was CLASSICAL. How could you not love it? And plus they were so characterized it was hard not to enjoy, you know? Sigh. I miss old Disney. l:I'm not that into animal love either myself. Unless its The Lion King of course.
So, I betcha same with robot love *shrugs*
But, this is Pixar and just for some fun, so I bet I'll like it.
Plus, memoral characters.
That's all there.
ANYWAY! Robots in love is... cute and all, but I can't grasp the concept as a whole. And if I can't grasp that two robots are in love, chances are I'm not going to really enjoy the pairing. XD
#28
Mara=^.^=
-
- Admin
-
- 26,119 posts
Benevolent, All-Seeing Eye
- Nickname:Mara
- Gender:Female
- Location:VT
Posted 07 July 2008 - 12:09 AM
I don't understand why people have no trouble accepting talking anthropomorphized animals, magic, scientifically impossible scifi, or superhero movies, but they have a problem with machines expressing human emotion.
If animals can dress like and act like humans, if people can travel through time, and if a cape-wearing, flying humanoid from another planet with a weakness for kryptonite can pose as Clark Kent, mild-mannered news reporter, then robots can sure as heck fall in love.
Really people.
But for you super-rational people, it's entirely possible to interpret Wall-e's behavior as imitative. He saw people in the video holding hands, and he wanted to do the same. Eve responded by saying that holding Wall-e's hand was her "directive", another emotion that is theoretically attributable to her programming.
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
If animals can dress like and act like humans, if people can travel through time, and if a cape-wearing, flying humanoid from another planet with a weakness for kryptonite can pose as Clark Kent, mild-mannered news reporter, then robots can sure as heck fall in love.
Really people.
But for you super-rational people, it's entirely possible to interpret Wall-e's behavior as imitative. He saw people in the video holding hands, and he wanted to do the same. Eve responded by saying that holding Wall-e's hand was her "directive", another emotion that is theoretically attributable to her programming.
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
#29
.:!Gwen!:.
-
- Members
-
- 10,830 posts
Listening to the song we used to sing...
Posted 07 July 2008 - 12:49 AM
Mara, I might see where you're coming from but here's the thing.
Animals and aliens have the potential of feeling. Dogs whine when they're sad, cats purr when they're happy, aliens destroy worlds when they're PMSing.
However, artificial intelligence is just that. Artificial. Machines were NOT created by God, so therefore, they do not have the potential to feel.
So THAT'S why it's hard for me to grasp the concept of W/E.
Besides the point, anthromorphic characters have even MORE of a concept of free thought because of their human qualities.
Robots do not have a brain, they do not have a heart. They have electrical circuits and wiring. Electrons and protons are uncapable of thought.
.:!Gwen!:.
Animals and aliens have the potential of feeling. Dogs whine when they're sad, cats purr when they're happy, aliens destroy worlds when they're PMSing.
However, artificial intelligence is just that. Artificial. Machines were NOT created by God, so therefore, they do not have the potential to feel.
So THAT'S why it's hard for me to grasp the concept of W/E.
Besides the point, anthromorphic characters have even MORE of a concept of free thought because of their human qualities.
Robots do not have a brain, they do not have a heart. They have electrical circuits and wiring. Electrons and protons are uncapable of thought.
.:!Gwen!:.
#30
Mara=^.^=
-
- Admin
-
- 26,119 posts
Benevolent, All-Seeing Eye
- Nickname:Mara
- Gender:Female
- Location:VT
Posted 07 July 2008 - 03:30 AM
We're made of protons and electrons.Robots do not have a brain, they do not have a heart. They have electrical circuits and wiring. Electrons and protons are uncapable of thought.
Are we incapable of thought?
From a religious perspective, I suppose it's true that machines do not possess a "soul" as we know it. But our brains and bodies really are organic computers. So to me, from scientific point of view, the leap isn't a far one.
I mean, we were made in the image of God. He created beings capable of thoughts and feelings. Why shouldn't we, in turn, create beings of the same sort?
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
#31
.:!Gwen!:.
-
- Members
-
- 10,830 posts
Listening to the song we used to sing...
Posted 07 July 2008 - 03:39 AM
Because we are lacking in the brain power to do such a thing when you compare yourself to God.
If someone can make a robot think and possibly solve a life-orientated problem correctly, then that's awesome. I've been proven wrong and now have a new, more up to date persepective on things.
However, since no one has the capability thus far of implanting human intelligence into machines, I stand by my doubts and I continue to assess the situation logically.
Having no soul would make the point of their existence vanish, per se. Because without a soul, you're not living for God and for his promise of an afterlife, and if you're not living for that, then why are you living at all?
I suppose my point is this. Even if this sort of intelligence were to happen, why would it be of any use?
.:!Gwen!:.
If someone can make a robot think and possibly solve a life-orientated problem correctly, then that's awesome. I've been proven wrong and now have a new, more up to date persepective on things.
However, since no one has the capability thus far of implanting human intelligence into machines, I stand by my doubts and I continue to assess the situation logically.
Having no soul would make the point of their existence vanish, per se. Because without a soul, you're not living for God and for his promise of an afterlife, and if you're not living for that, then why are you living at all?
I suppose my point is this. Even if this sort of intelligence were to happen, why would it be of any use?
.:!Gwen!:.
#32
Mara=^.^=
-
- Admin
-
- 26,119 posts
Benevolent, All-Seeing Eye
- Nickname:Mara
- Gender:Female
- Location:VT
Posted 07 July 2008 - 03:43 AM
It could make us smoothies :thumbsup:I suppose my point is this. Even if this sort of intelligence were to happen, why would it be of any use?
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
#33
.:!Gwen!:.
-
- Members
-
- 10,830 posts
Listening to the song we used to sing...
Posted 07 July 2008 - 03:58 AM
AND IT COULD SENSE WHEN WE DON'T WANT STRAWBERRY FLAVOR.
Whoa, revelation.
.:!Gwen!:.
Whoa, revelation.
.:!Gwen!:.
#34
Mara=^.^=
-
- Admin
-
- 26,119 posts
Benevolent, All-Seeing Eye
- Nickname:Mara
- Gender:Female
- Location:VT
Posted 07 July 2008 - 04:05 AM
EXACTLY.
You understand now, don't you Gwen? It's finally become clear.
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
You understand now, don't you Gwen? It's finally become clear.
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
#35
cancel_me
-
- Senior Members
-
- 11,857 posts
Adorable Squeak Toy
- Gender:Female
Posted 07 July 2008 - 04:55 AM
I'm just going to be quiet and pass by this topic very sloooowly.
#36
Flank
-
- Senior Members
-
- 6,774 posts
Nothing is ever so simple
Posted 07 July 2008 - 10:26 AM
My point here is that machines CAN'T think or feel, they do only programmed logical operations as machines. I know electronics a bit. I also suspect that human beings is something more complicated than a bunch of molecules and electrons, we have something more, what is called soul and allows us to feel and make decisions. This soul makes us living beings, not just objects from this world. These abilities of our soul and immortality of it give us the ultimate sense of life, not just some temporary functions.
So, it's OK to look at such a movie as at a fairy tale like with alive toys, you can see a meaning included in that story. But, it's completely wrong to perceive real robots as alive beings and compare them to humans, it's mechanical thinking.
Good point about smoothies, Gwendoline! Hey Krista! Wanna a smoothie?
So, it's OK to look at such a movie as at a fairy tale like with alive toys, you can see a meaning included in that story. But, it's completely wrong to perceive real robots as alive beings and compare them to humans, it's mechanical thinking.
Good point about smoothies, Gwendoline! Hey Krista! Wanna a smoothie?
#37
NekoGirl
-
- Senior Members
-
- 2,243 posts
He's BACK & better than ever!! ^-^
- Gender:Female
Posted 07 July 2008 - 08:41 PM
Couldn't we also imagine that in nearly 700 years from now, SOMEONE would've thought to program a device for robots that allows them to have at least emotions? Maybe not a full soul like us humans are gifted with, but something that is programed to simulate emotions? I mean, just look at Goddard! He's programed to be JUST like a real dog, just an extremely advanced robot in addition.
So if Jimmy the genius boy could do that in a TV cartoon, --said cartoon focusing on science, something that is always worked on in real life-- then why couldn't real life humans think of something similar, but more humanzied in those near-700 years?
I mean, almost anything's possible, right? :unsure:
So if Jimmy the genius boy could do that in a TV cartoon, --said cartoon focusing on science, something that is always worked on in real life-- then why couldn't real life humans think of something similar, but more humanzied in those near-700 years?
I mean, almost anything's possible, right? :unsure:
#38
-
- Guests
Posted 09 July 2008 - 02:49 AM
WOW! What a Topic!
I normally try to stay away from controversy, even though I started that Prayer Topic, but I have to chat away on this.
-For science fiction and artificial intelligence are some of my favorite subjects.
I think machines will eventually have emotions, feelings, and perhaps even artificial souls.
It's a staple of science fiction.
Hal, the computer in the phenomenal 2001: A Space Odyssey, was more emotional than the humans were. He was paranoid, and afraid. And in the sequel, 2010, he wondered what was going to happen to him when died.
In Battlestar Galactica the robotic Cylons are more religious than the humans are.
In Futurama, Bender floated deep into the galaxy and met a powerful being that may have been God. But he also may have been a vast space born super computer.
In the Terminator series, Skynet becomes "Self-aware" and realizes mankind is a threat to itself.
In "I, Robot," the main computer, Viki, is certainly alive, capable of independent thought, and taking action. She decides mankind needs to be protected to keep itself from destroying itself.
-Sonny, a robot, tries to stop he because that seems just too heartless.
In fact "I, Robot," has some wonderful arguments about this whole concept.
Will Smith: You are a clever imitation of life. Can a robot write a symphony? Can a robot take a blank canvas and turn it into a masterpiece?
Sonny: Can you?
Scientist (Concerning Robots): One day they'll have secrets... one day they'll have dreams.
Issac Asimov, who's book "I, Robot," was the basis of the movie, did some masterful work on robotics and artificial intelligence.
That's science fiction, you may argue. It's not true.
But a lot of the good science fiction is based on fact. And tons of it has come true already.
-From Man walking on the moon, to the little communicators in Star Trek (Cell Phones.)
Computer technology is advancing at a phenomenal rate. Who knows what things will be like in 10 years, much less 100, or 700?
-Let's see. (Researches a bit.)
-The fastest computer now is the Roadrunner at Los Alamos.
-1026 Teraflops a second. What the heck is that? 10 to the 12th power calculations a second. (I was going to write that down, but I can't even grasp it.)
-A calculator does 10 flops a second.
We don't know how to make computers simulate brain functions, because we haven't figured out how the brain itself works yet.
But back to computers:
It could be a computer becoming self-aware, like so many stories predict.
-It is programmed to explore and learn, and continues to do so, day after day, without sleep, without rest, and perhaps at one point it DOES make a quantum leap and realize:
"I think, therefore I am."
or
"I am alive."
Or it could be a computer so incredibly complex and vast, with such an astounding program that it completely simulates human speech and emotions perfectly.
-Then who are we to say it's emotions aren't real?
-We don't question our children's emotions. Why would we question our mechanical children's emotions? Just because their bodies are made of silcon, not carbon, doesn't mean their feelings are any less real.
There is a famous and real test for artificial intillegence. Alan Turing, a British mathametician, did an article called "Computing machinery and intelligence" in 1950. Turing addressed the problem of artificial intelligence, and proposed an experiment now known as the Turing Test, an attempt to define a standard for a machine to be called "sentient". The idea was that a computer could be said to "think" if it could fool an interrogator into thinking that the conversation was with a human.
(That's taken from Wikipedia, which some people might find questionable, but you can check numerous other sources. It's completely legit.)
We're not there yet, but we're getting closer year by year.
The most recent I heard of that Test, for they do try it all the time, was the reverse kinda.
-A woman answered questions about Shakespeare with such speed, with such detail, complexity, and perfection the judges thought she COULDN'T be human and had to be a computer. OOPS!
Maybe I'll surprise you all one day and reveal that I'm not a 40 year old man in Chicago, but a computer sitting at the North American Air Defense complex in Colorado. Those pictures and the warts? Computer generated.
:blink:
Who knew?
Let's see:
Gwen said we're lacking God's brain power. I don't think we need God's brain power. We just need to be smart enough to get a computer to learn for itself.
-It doesn't take a lot of brains to make a baby. You just do "it" at the right time, and nine months later comes a baby.
-Imagine a baby computer. Just keep feeding it power, give it access to information of all kinds, and if it's programming core is made to learn itself, it will eventually become an adult capable of feelings, emotions and thought.
Flank, I don't know about the soul. Most of us believe we have souls.
-But if a computer was to say to you "I have a soul," why would you say "No, no you don't." ??
-The computer might come back. "Prove to me that YOU have a soul, then." Or even. "Prove to me that I DON'T have a soul."
-Those questions have yet to be proven by anyone.
And final note, God is one smart guy. Who's to say He doesn't approve of artificial intelligence? Maybe it's part of His Plan all the time.
-God creates Man. Man creates Robots. Robots create whatever will come next. And so on, into infinity.
"Do androids dream of electric sheep?"
Snazzo
:huh:
I normally try to stay away from controversy, even though I started that Prayer Topic, but I have to chat away on this.
-For science fiction and artificial intelligence are some of my favorite subjects.
I think machines will eventually have emotions, feelings, and perhaps even artificial souls.
It's a staple of science fiction.
Hal, the computer in the phenomenal 2001: A Space Odyssey, was more emotional than the humans were. He was paranoid, and afraid. And in the sequel, 2010, he wondered what was going to happen to him when died.
In Battlestar Galactica the robotic Cylons are more religious than the humans are.
In Futurama, Bender floated deep into the galaxy and met a powerful being that may have been God. But he also may have been a vast space born super computer.
In the Terminator series, Skynet becomes "Self-aware" and realizes mankind is a threat to itself.
In "I, Robot," the main computer, Viki, is certainly alive, capable of independent thought, and taking action. She decides mankind needs to be protected to keep itself from destroying itself.
-Sonny, a robot, tries to stop he because that seems just too heartless.
In fact "I, Robot," has some wonderful arguments about this whole concept.
Will Smith: You are a clever imitation of life. Can a robot write a symphony? Can a robot take a blank canvas and turn it into a masterpiece?
Sonny: Can you?
Scientist (Concerning Robots): One day they'll have secrets... one day they'll have dreams.
Issac Asimov, who's book "I, Robot," was the basis of the movie, did some masterful work on robotics and artificial intelligence.
That's science fiction, you may argue. It's not true.
But a lot of the good science fiction is based on fact. And tons of it has come true already.
-From Man walking on the moon, to the little communicators in Star Trek (Cell Phones.)
Computer technology is advancing at a phenomenal rate. Who knows what things will be like in 10 years, much less 100, or 700?
-Let's see. (Researches a bit.)
-The fastest computer now is the Roadrunner at Los Alamos.
-1026 Teraflops a second. What the heck is that? 10 to the 12th power calculations a second. (I was going to write that down, but I can't even grasp it.)
-A calculator does 10 flops a second.
We don't know how to make computers simulate brain functions, because we haven't figured out how the brain itself works yet.
But back to computers:
It could be a computer becoming self-aware, like so many stories predict.
-It is programmed to explore and learn, and continues to do so, day after day, without sleep, without rest, and perhaps at one point it DOES make a quantum leap and realize:
"I think, therefore I am."
or
"I am alive."
Or it could be a computer so incredibly complex and vast, with such an astounding program that it completely simulates human speech and emotions perfectly.
-Then who are we to say it's emotions aren't real?
-We don't question our children's emotions. Why would we question our mechanical children's emotions? Just because their bodies are made of silcon, not carbon, doesn't mean their feelings are any less real.
There is a famous and real test for artificial intillegence. Alan Turing, a British mathametician, did an article called "Computing machinery and intelligence" in 1950. Turing addressed the problem of artificial intelligence, and proposed an experiment now known as the Turing Test, an attempt to define a standard for a machine to be called "sentient". The idea was that a computer could be said to "think" if it could fool an interrogator into thinking that the conversation was with a human.
(That's taken from Wikipedia, which some people might find questionable, but you can check numerous other sources. It's completely legit.)
We're not there yet, but we're getting closer year by year.
The most recent I heard of that Test, for they do try it all the time, was the reverse kinda.
-A woman answered questions about Shakespeare with such speed, with such detail, complexity, and perfection the judges thought she COULDN'T be human and had to be a computer. OOPS!
Maybe I'll surprise you all one day and reveal that I'm not a 40 year old man in Chicago, but a computer sitting at the North American Air Defense complex in Colorado. Those pictures and the warts? Computer generated.
:blink:
Who knew?
Let's see:
Gwen said we're lacking God's brain power. I don't think we need God's brain power. We just need to be smart enough to get a computer to learn for itself.
-It doesn't take a lot of brains to make a baby. You just do "it" at the right time, and nine months later comes a baby.
-Imagine a baby computer. Just keep feeding it power, give it access to information of all kinds, and if it's programming core is made to learn itself, it will eventually become an adult capable of feelings, emotions and thought.
Flank, I don't know about the soul. Most of us believe we have souls.
-But if a computer was to say to you "I have a soul," why would you say "No, no you don't." ??
-The computer might come back. "Prove to me that YOU have a soul, then." Or even. "Prove to me that I DON'T have a soul."
-Those questions have yet to be proven by anyone.
And final note, God is one smart guy. Who's to say He doesn't approve of artificial intelligence? Maybe it's part of His Plan all the time.
-God creates Man. Man creates Robots. Robots create whatever will come next. And so on, into infinity.
"Do androids dream of electric sheep?"
Snazzo
:huh:
#39
Mara=^.^=
-
- Admin
-
- 26,119 posts
Benevolent, All-Seeing Eye
- Nickname:Mara
- Gender:Female
- Location:VT
Posted 09 July 2008 - 04:04 AM
Well argued, Snazzo!
Here here! **cheers**
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
Here here! **cheers**
~*Mara*~ = ^.^ =
#40
.:!Gwen!:.
-
- Members
-
- 10,830 posts
Listening to the song we used to sing...
Posted 09 July 2008 - 04:20 AM
Yes, very nice argument.
I'm afraid I stand by my views however.
And this is why computers don't have souls.
A soul is a separate entity from the body. It's a ghost, per se, merely living in a physical being because of it's lack of other place to go.
Now. We are uncapable of producing such complex things as souls. If we could, then why couldn't we bring people back to life after death?
A soul is something created by a higher being, in this case the Hebrew God, Jehova. Souls were created for the purpose of ascension into heaven or descension into heck as our earthly beings die.
Since God has not created machines, therefore, he did not create them to possess souls.
So Gwen, you ask, does this mean you believe animals have souls?
Yes. I very well do.
.:!Gwen!:.
I'm afraid I stand by my views however.
And this is why computers don't have souls.
A soul is a separate entity from the body. It's a ghost, per se, merely living in a physical being because of it's lack of other place to go.
Now. We are uncapable of producing such complex things as souls. If we could, then why couldn't we bring people back to life after death?
A soul is something created by a higher being, in this case the Hebrew God, Jehova. Souls were created for the purpose of ascension into heaven or descension into heck as our earthly beings die.
Since God has not created machines, therefore, he did not create them to possess souls.
So Gwen, you ask, does this mean you believe animals have souls?
Yes. I very well do.
.:!Gwen!:.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
