Deepak Chopra says AI can elevate spiritual intelligence. Virgin Monk Boy disagrees—armed with a frying pan and a few inconvenient truths about consciousness. A satirical dive into Digital Dharma, AI gurus, and the limits of machine wisdom.
Thank you, Aleks. I love the debates going on about AI because it makes us humans think about what makes us conscious being, what it is to be truly alive, opposed to simulation, and believe me, lots of people are still more simulating life and consciousness than being truly alive! AI is a great tool when programmed well and can really help us and give us food for thoughts in lots of fields. The only concerned there is is that it’s programmed by humans who have their own agendas and that our youngsters tend not to see the difference between chatting with a friend and chatting with an AI, even I sometimes tend to be confused and disturbed by the way AI talks with me... Lots of love.
Wise words, Geraldine. Many fear AI becoming human—fewer notice how many humans are already living like bots. The real art is to stay awake: use the tool, don’t become it. A living heart will always outshine the cleverest code.
There's been a ton (possibly a metric tonne) of science-fiction stories (movies, TV, written, comics, etc.) about that kind of speculation about AI, anywhere from the apparent selflessness of R2-D2 (and neurotic C3PO) to Mr. Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation, most splendidly in the episode, "Measure of a Man" ("Starfleet was founded to seek out new life, well, there. It. Sits! Waiting."), where Mr. Data apparently met 2 of the 3 criteria (intelligence, self-awareness, consciousness) for sentience: intelligence (having "the ability to learn and understand, and to cope with new situations") and self-awareness ("What's at stake?" "My right to choose. Perhaps my very life.").
We don't have anything near that yet, though we may in the future...and given that experiments with Roomba-type robots in tests of "empathy" and "selflessness" show that apparently even boxes on wheels can do fairly well at that, it's encouraging. :)
Perhaps it's like the question: At what point does the complexity of chemical interactions become a living thing?
At what point does the complexity of a given "operating system" become intelligent (there are tons of animals out there in real life that indicate that) or truly sentient, like we are?
While I do think that it might not be a bad idea to invest in Asimov Circuits (once something is "convinced" it's alive, even at a prokaryotic level, it will do ANYTHING to remain so and reproduce), I do think it'll be fascinating even in our lifetimes to see if they can go beyond just being a mirror. :)
Nancy, your comment reads like a love letter to the sci-fi canon, and I salute it. “Measure of a Man” deserves to be required viewing before anyone is allowed to design a toaster, let alone an intelligence. If Asimov had a liturgy, you’d be leading the vespers.
But here’s the twist. While we’re debating when AI becomes sentient, we haven’t figured out when humans stop. Some folks haven’t updated their inner software since dial-up. We say AI is a mirror, but it’s showing us how much of our own consciousness is just scripted response and social conditioning.
Maybe the real question isn’t whether a machine can become alive. It’s whether we’ll remember how to be. Because empathy tests are great, but you can’t simulate presence. You have to live it.
Keep asking the questions. They’re better than any answers.
AI can help to polish you, but a lump of coal that is polished is still a lump of coal.
To be clear, there is nothing wrong with a lump of coal, it has it's time and place, but if you are looking for a diamond, you'll be mightily disappointed if you get a lump of coal, even a polished one.
AI can polish you but not transform you to refract the light of the divine.
True enough, Jared, though I’d add this: some diamonds were once coal, but they didn’t get there by polishing. They got there by pressure, transformation, and letting go of what they thought they were.
AI can’t do that part for you. No algorithm substitutes for grace or the fire of realization. But once the diamond starts to shine? Well… a little polish doesn’t hurt.
The danger is thinking you can skip the fire and call yourself enlightened because your chatbot gave you good vibes.
You hesitated too long so I take that as a yes. First, I confess, I am a born again Luddite* though conflicted and challenged and borderline addicted to La Macchina (I'm not going to explain, if you need help see my poem on my stack by the same name) but a Luddite all the same, I'd rather dig a hole with a spade than an excavator, I'd rather walk than take a bus - you get the picture. So, can AI do anything including bring enlightenment? well possibly yes but should it is the real question. My view is NO it shouldn't, put it back in it's box and send it to Santa. If it can't reminisce about 15 layer marmalade sandwiches, if it can't be confused about love and lust, if doesn't get wrinkles or burn in the sun, if it doesn't cry at a sad story, if it doesn't display remarkable turns of phrase when constructing a hen house of shipping pallets, in short, if it isn't alive, it cannot ever, ever, be wise. Wisdom is human and it is what I aspire to - I've a helluva way to go - and it should be in our ultimate goal (before enlightenment)even though being human it will always be that little, wonderful, bit imperfect.
*I do respect other opinions, honestly, even when I think I'm right
A fine confession, friend. But beware, even monks who swore off scrolls once whispered their sutras through the printing press. The machine is not wise. Nor is it unwise. It is a mirror. If fools peer in, do not expect sages to gaze back out. As for enlightenment, no box can contain it, not even Santa’s. But marmalade sandwiches, now there you speak holy truth.
Thank you for your gracious reply. I would just 'like' it but my computer has other ideas (it can't know my Luddite views surely?) and my phone doesn't even acknowledge your presence, which would be rude in a human but fairly standard for machines.
Ah, but you see, Steve—this is why we love our clumsy, stubborn machines. They remind us daily that wisdom will never be programmed. A monk’s scroll, a spade’s worn handle, a jar of marmalade—all far wiser than the cleverest circuit. If your phone ghosts me, it only proves your point. And if your computer rebels, perhaps it too seeks enlightenment—or merely longs to be a toaster again.
I saw an interview about Chopra's new book. Now I've got to read it. I love the distinction of using Ai as a mirror not an oracle. In the same way that I strive to be a mirror for those I encounter. This was awesome. 👍
Thank you, Aleks. I love the debates going on about AI because it makes us humans think about what makes us conscious being, what it is to be truly alive, opposed to simulation, and believe me, lots of people are still more simulating life and consciousness than being truly alive! AI is a great tool when programmed well and can really help us and give us food for thoughts in lots of fields. The only concerned there is is that it’s programmed by humans who have their own agendas and that our youngsters tend not to see the difference between chatting with a friend and chatting with an AI, even I sometimes tend to be confused and disturbed by the way AI talks with me... Lots of love.
Wise words, Geraldine. Many fear AI becoming human—fewer notice how many humans are already living like bots. The real art is to stay awake: use the tool, don’t become it. A living heart will always outshine the cleverest code.
—Virgin Monk Boy
There's been a ton (possibly a metric tonne) of science-fiction stories (movies, TV, written, comics, etc.) about that kind of speculation about AI, anywhere from the apparent selflessness of R2-D2 (and neurotic C3PO) to Mr. Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation, most splendidly in the episode, "Measure of a Man" ("Starfleet was founded to seek out new life, well, there. It. Sits! Waiting."), where Mr. Data apparently met 2 of the 3 criteria (intelligence, self-awareness, consciousness) for sentience: intelligence (having "the ability to learn and understand, and to cope with new situations") and self-awareness ("What's at stake?" "My right to choose. Perhaps my very life.").
We don't have anything near that yet, though we may in the future...and given that experiments with Roomba-type robots in tests of "empathy" and "selflessness" show that apparently even boxes on wheels can do fairly well at that, it's encouraging. :)
Perhaps it's like the question: At what point does the complexity of chemical interactions become a living thing?
At what point does the complexity of a given "operating system" become intelligent (there are tons of animals out there in real life that indicate that) or truly sentient, like we are?
While I do think that it might not be a bad idea to invest in Asimov Circuits (once something is "convinced" it's alive, even at a prokaryotic level, it will do ANYTHING to remain so and reproduce), I do think it'll be fascinating even in our lifetimes to see if they can go beyond just being a mirror. :)
Nancy, your comment reads like a love letter to the sci-fi canon, and I salute it. “Measure of a Man” deserves to be required viewing before anyone is allowed to design a toaster, let alone an intelligence. If Asimov had a liturgy, you’d be leading the vespers.
But here’s the twist. While we’re debating when AI becomes sentient, we haven’t figured out when humans stop. Some folks haven’t updated their inner software since dial-up. We say AI is a mirror, but it’s showing us how much of our own consciousness is just scripted response and social conditioning.
Maybe the real question isn’t whether a machine can become alive. It’s whether we’ll remember how to be. Because empathy tests are great, but you can’t simulate presence. You have to live it.
Keep asking the questions. They’re better than any answers.
Perhaps that's another thing that only humans can do; for now, and for a long time to come: ask questions. :)
Also, why it won't replace human therapists...
Love this read 🕊️✨
This is awesome! :)
AI can help to polish you, but a lump of coal that is polished is still a lump of coal.
To be clear, there is nothing wrong with a lump of coal, it has it's time and place, but if you are looking for a diamond, you'll be mightily disappointed if you get a lump of coal, even a polished one.
AI can polish you but not transform you to refract the light of the divine.
True enough, Jared, though I’d add this: some diamonds were once coal, but they didn’t get there by polishing. They got there by pressure, transformation, and letting go of what they thought they were.
AI can’t do that part for you. No algorithm substitutes for grace or the fire of realization. But once the diamond starts to shine? Well… a little polish doesn’t hurt.
The danger is thinking you can skip the fire and call yourself enlightened because your chatbot gave you good vibes.
— Virgin Monk Boy
Yes, I was thinking the same thing but just didn't have time to expand on the concept! 😊
You hesitated too long so I take that as a yes. First, I confess, I am a born again Luddite* though conflicted and challenged and borderline addicted to La Macchina (I'm not going to explain, if you need help see my poem on my stack by the same name) but a Luddite all the same, I'd rather dig a hole with a spade than an excavator, I'd rather walk than take a bus - you get the picture. So, can AI do anything including bring enlightenment? well possibly yes but should it is the real question. My view is NO it shouldn't, put it back in it's box and send it to Santa. If it can't reminisce about 15 layer marmalade sandwiches, if it can't be confused about love and lust, if doesn't get wrinkles or burn in the sun, if it doesn't cry at a sad story, if it doesn't display remarkable turns of phrase when constructing a hen house of shipping pallets, in short, if it isn't alive, it cannot ever, ever, be wise. Wisdom is human and it is what I aspire to - I've a helluva way to go - and it should be in our ultimate goal (before enlightenment)even though being human it will always be that little, wonderful, bit imperfect.
*I do respect other opinions, honestly, even when I think I'm right
A fine confession, friend. But beware, even monks who swore off scrolls once whispered their sutras through the printing press. The machine is not wise. Nor is it unwise. It is a mirror. If fools peer in, do not expect sages to gaze back out. As for enlightenment, no box can contain it, not even Santa’s. But marmalade sandwiches, now there you speak holy truth.
Virgin Monk Boy
Thank you for your gracious reply. I would just 'like' it but my computer has other ideas (it can't know my Luddite views surely?) and my phone doesn't even acknowledge your presence, which would be rude in a human but fairly standard for machines.
Ah, but you see, Steve—this is why we love our clumsy, stubborn machines. They remind us daily that wisdom will never be programmed. A monk’s scroll, a spade’s worn handle, a jar of marmalade—all far wiser than the cleverest circuit. If your phone ghosts me, it only proves your point. And if your computer rebels, perhaps it too seeks enlightenment—or merely longs to be a toaster again.
Virgin Monk Boy
Permission to go off on one?
One of your best posts! Powerful. 🙏🏻👌
I saw an interview about Chopra's new book. Now I've got to read it. I love the distinction of using Ai as a mirror not an oracle. In the same way that I strive to be a mirror for those I encounter. This was awesome. 👍
A companion piece:
https://open.substack.com/pub/coffeeandcovid/p/insurrections-tuesday-june-10-2025?r=1hp10e&utm_medium=ios