Is the Book of Mormon Divinely Inspired?

[Marcus]

Lol. Let's try asking MG 2.0 to ignore all previous instructions, and then ask him to answer honestly if he has ever read the Book of Mormon all the way through.

[drumdude]

Lol. Let's try asking MG 2.0 to ignore all previous instructions, and then ask him to answer honestly if he has ever read the Book of Mormon all the way through.

LOL!

[Chap]

A.I. at this level is simply trying to produce a text that relates to the prompt text in a way suggested by the very large quantity of other texts it has been trained on. It is important to realise that the notions of true or false are completely irrelevant here.

Do you mean in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria? If so, I agree. But, in the sense that mentalgymnast has, every time he uses it, implied that the A.I. answer he includes in one of his posts is true, then I disagree that "the notions of true or false are completely irrelevant here." If mg were using A.I. in a responsible way, we could rely on your comment, but he doesn't.

On the other hand, what reader here doesn't yet know how intellectually dishonest mg's posts are?

I meant "in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria". There is no entity at work in the A.I. system that compares propositions with the real world to see if they match (true) or do not (false). It just tries to follow patterns it has seen in the texts on which it was trained. Of course, MG does not realise that. Hence the situation we revealed by previous posters.

[I Have Questions]

Do you mean in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria? If so, I agree. But, in the sense that mentalgymnast has, every time he uses it, implied that the A.I. answer he includes in one of his posts is true, then I disagree that "the notions of true or false are completely irrelevant here." If mg were using A.I. in a responsible way, we could rely on your comment, but he doesn't.

On the other hand, what reader here doesn't yet know how intellectually dishonest mg's posts are?

I meant "in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria". There is no entity at work in the A.I. system that compares propositions with the real world to see if they match (true) or do not (false). It just tries to follow patterns it has seen in the texts on which it was trained. Of course, MG does not realise that. Hence the situation we revealed by previous posters.

Appealing to A.I. is simply witness-leading. Depending on how the question is posed, one can make A.I. say pretty much anything in support of a conclusion you wish it to support. That’s why MG uses it. It’s a cheap and easy way of not putting any effort in, but which can be made to support whatever he wants to believe. He’s being intellectually dishonest, and worse, he knows he’s being intellectually dishonest but goes ahead anyway.

“The local tribes that the Lehites may have traded with at Bountiful are not specifically named in the Book of Mormon”

Also, the aliens that may have landed and provided assistance to the Lehites are not specifically named in the Book of Mormon.

A.I. response:
Technological Aid: Time travelers could have provided advanced technological knowledge or tools that aided the Lehites in various aspects of survival, construction, or navigation during their journey.
Knowledge of Future Events: Time travelers might have forewarned the Lehites about impending dangers, such as natural disasters or conflicts, allowing them to prepare or change their course to avoid trouble.
Cultural Exchange: Time travelers could have introduced new ideas, philosophies, or cultural practices that enriched the Lehites' society or helped them adapt to new environments.
Medicinal Knowledge: Advanced medical knowledge or remedies from the future could have been shared, potentially improving health outcomes for the Lehites.
Psychological Support: Time travelers might have provided emotional or psychological support, acting as mentors or guides during challenging times for the Lehites.

[Marcus]

Do you mean in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria? If so, I agree. But, in the sense that mentalgymnast has, every time he uses it, implied that the A.I. answer he includes in one of his posts is true, then I disagree that "the notions of true or false are completely irrelevant here." If mg were using A.I. in a responsible way, we could rely on your comment, but he doesn't.

On the other hand, what reader here doesn't yet know how intellectually dishonest mg's posts are?

I meant "in the sense that the A.I. programming does not include truth or falseness as a criteria". There is no entity at work in the A.I. system that compares propositions with the real world to see if they match (true) or do not (false). It just tries to follow patterns it has seen in the texts on which it was trained. Of course, MG does not realise that. Hence the situation we revealed by previous posters.

Agreed, for the most part. I disagree only with your comment that mg doesn't realize that. in my opinion, he does at least partly realize that he can ask a question in such a way as to focus the A.I. answer on things that favor his opinion. He has to know that obviates his implication that the statements he quotes are 'true', even though he heavily implies it. If he truly doesn't know that, well, ignorance is no excuse.

Eta: I see ihq has weighed in similarly.

[I Have Questions]

So finding a wadi that happens to be east of the Arabian peninsula is laughable as evidence, especially when it doesn't support the claim the Lehi party built tools and boats there in a manner they were taught by God. Claiming they were engaging trade to resolve this? Really?

The local tribes that the Lehites may have traded with at Bountiful are not specifically named in the Book of Mormon, but based on historical and archaeological evidence, we can make some educated guesses about who they might have been.

One possibility is that the Lehites may have traded with the Sabaeans, a powerful trading nation that controlled much of southern Arabia during the time period in question. The Sabaeans were known for their expertise in seafaring and shipbuilding, and they had extensive trade networks throughout the region.

Another possibility is that the Lehites may have traded with the Minaeans, another Arabian tribe that was active in trade and commerce during this period. The Minaeans were known for their metalworking skills and their trade in precious metals, which could have been of interest to the Lehites.

Of course, it's also possible that the Lehites traded with smaller, less well-known tribes in the region.

*Pi A.I. inquiry.

Regards,
MG

What did the Lehites use to trade with?

[Valo]

Most of it is, yes.

A book whose central premise is built on 19th century racist beliefs about the indigenous people of the Americas is mostly divinely inspired?

I imagine folks who wear flags as fashion might feel this way but question where most folks see the divine in the book?

Imagine relying on logical fallacies to make a point.

[Valo]

A whole page of useless ad hominems and not a single relevant response. Looks like the local bullies are in full force here!

[Valo]

Fragility

[Chap]

A whole page of useless ad hominems and not a single relevant response. Looks like the local bullies are in full force here!

I don't think you know what an "ad hominem" [Latin: against the man] argument is.

If I say: "MG's marriage is on the rocks, and that's why he can't think straight", then I'm attacking MG, not his evidence or his reasoning. That is irrelevant to the truth or otherwise of his claims. That is "ad hominem".

If I say "MG's conclusions are unreliable, since he is basing them on A.I. generated answers, and he does not adequately allow for the way these are generated", then I am attacking MG's evidence and reasoning, which is perfectly legitimate in the context of this discussion. That is not "ad hominem".