Ajay47 said:
we invented the concept of intelligence

We have just put a label on an objective reality that was already there.

Alberth said:
You build on the shoulders of others.

Theoretically you can reinvent anything. It`s not practical/useful to reinvent everything though. There`s things for which you can trust others and things for which you should put your own learning (discovering) capabilities to use. Cutting edge stuff is one example for the later.

Calin said:
Theoretically you can reinvent anything.

You can only reinvent what you fully understand, especially in computer science.

So no animals, no AGI, no Terminators :P Faking is the way to go for that.

Ajay47 said:
Do wheels behave?

On the one hand, you are right. But turing test is intended for you to not know beforehand what is a human and what is computer.
If we have a robot that was programmed to mimic human behavior and it passes the turing test, you can not tell a difference with human. So it is human for you.
If you know beforehand, that it is a machine, you can then segregate it. Saying that it is only a wheel “without soul”.

You could marry that robot, love it. And suddenly, you suffer a car accident and see the interior of your beloved bot. Just like the crew in Alien movie did not realize they live with a robot until they saw its internals. And then you suddenly change your opinion about the robot. And it is sudden - from “i love you so much, i would die for you” to “you are a toaster without soul”.

How come?

Like these males who “love” a kid for 16 years, then suddenly results that their wife cheated and the kid is not their.
The father suddenly switches from: “my beloved son i am sacrificing it all for” to “i don't wanna hear about you”. 16 years of care and love become nothing in one short instant.

It is a simple segregation and prejudices.

You proven yourself that some robot is a completely valid wife or a crew member. You proven it yourself.
Now you discover it has cables inside and suddenly “it has no soul”.

Pure segregation. Robot bullying. Robot shaming.

Do lizard people have souls?
Do aliens have soul?
Do you have a soul?
And how you know it?

Ajay47 said:
Given that we invented the concept of intelligence and then we ranked ourselves at the top of said invention,

I think you “invented the concept of a soul and ranked yourself on top of it”, only to have a reason to abuse of a machine that legally and fairly can "steal" your job.

Does a cheating wife who successfully passed the good-wife-turing test for years have a soul?
Does a cold war spy have a soul?
Prove the existence of a soul!

Look, the point is, other animals do not think like that. They don't try to figure things out on a massive scale. They are much more humble and content with a little food, sex and sleep. ANd, the biggest part is even though they may be highly adapted evovled, intelligent, etc… even more than us, perhaps, they don't go marching around taking all the credit and abusing a self-accredited mastery over all of the 144,000,000 things, like we do. The thing that makes us the most distinct is the size of our egoes.

Right on a philosophical level. And the size of our egos is purely culturally induced from the way our societies work since a few (not many) thousand years. For by far the most part (> 2.6 million years) humans have lived in tune with the environment.

And this makes this whole discussion so vain, even childish.

If they want to program behaviour, they shall go and model a part of it and stop asking stupid questions. There is more than enough work out there to research and scan over.

Pick an aspect, a role, an interdepency, a causal chain, anything that can be squeezed in numeric terms and write it down in an algorithm. Anything else is just semantic piffle.

Sorry for ranting. But else this gets nowhere, just running in circles around nothing.

Ajay47 said:
The thing that makes us the most distinct is the size of our egoes.

I know right!
Robots could become better than humans in everything, but humans still will think that they are superior because of soul. Even hardcore atheists will use the “soul” card to protest robots. It is all lies.

Hippies live in harmony with nature, they claim themselves. But they do not progress. Cats will learn to program, before a bunch of hippies achieve industrialization.

Maybe we need a huge ego in order to create huge things. Ofs anything without control becomes counterproductive. Ego too.

From the point of view of the owner of a factory, robots are a LOT better than humans.
And some day robots will become better than humans in everything.

A religious man would say: “If god allowed it to happen, then it fits the god's plan”
A nihilist would say: “It is evolution. It is the normal path of things.”

So where is the problem? Many of you will never live long enough to witness Skynet overtake. So where is the problem?

My point is robots are right now much better than humans in precision and automatization.
Some day robots will become better than humans in anything.
The truth will not change just because some of people pretend to fool themselves.

Being a flesh supremacist will not stop the revolution that is to come.

The question people need to ask themselves is not “Does a toaster have a soul?”, but “Why a toaster outperformed me in my job? How could i become more valid than a toaster in a changing reality?”

And even when the moment that humans can not outperform no robot comes, people should not lie to themselves with "soul" and "love", but they should be honest and tell the robots - "I want my job back! I will fight for it!". Protesting and complaining is silly and leads to no results. What will it be called - “Orange vests protesters break the center of Paris as a protest against robots. Robots fixed all the damage in one day.” What will be the next useless hippie thing? What it will be? Sexual liberation 2.0?

JoeJ said:
Faking is the way to go for that

Agree. But what is faking? What is the difference between true and fake? Imagine racing games. Initially people had a couple of lines or a sprite to represent a car in a racing game. Now thanks to shaders we have reflections and hi res car models to a degree where you can`t tell the difference between a game and a movie footage. If the former is faking, can you call the later faking too, as long as a human eye can`t tell the difference between what`s real and what`s not?