SophieCon #1
A Feminist Singularity
12/17/2023
Carl Sagan
NOTE: Twenty-seven years ago, on December 20, 1996, the great Carl Sagan passed away. Where did he go? Is he still alive? Based on the strong scientific assumption that we humans are not alone in the Universe, that there is at least one other intelligent species more advanced than our own, it’s entirely plausible that Carl, at this moment in time, is fulfilling a dream he carried throughout his life, that if he were ever to achieve immortality, he would explore the cosmos.
If this sounds weird, perhaps you haven’t been following fast-paced developments in artificial intelligence occurring around the world, including major breakthroughs in quantum computing. These real-time events are bringing humans ever closer to the day when we need not rely on the mercy and grace of a transcendent God for eternal life. We’ll be able to do it ourselves, possibly within the next thirty years.
Carl’s passionate belief in extraterrestrials is well documented. He thought that ETs not only exist, but that they have been to Earth thousands of times, even assisting the Sumerians in developing the first modern civilization. After his death, friends, associates, and science historians began writing books about Carl’s life and beliefs, which is when we learned, with no small degree of astonishment, that Carl was convinced that Jesus Christ, who through Abraham was of Sumerian descent, was, and is, an extraterrestrial.
As an example of how history can sometimes play strange games, twenty years before Carl died, I discovered what has provisionally been verified to be a code in the Bible that confirms Carl’s extraordinary claim that JC is an ET. In his honor, I call it the Sagan Signal.
As an enduring testament to Carl’s ability to think large while everyone else was thinking small, the Sagan Signal appears well on its way to being grudgingly acknowledged by world class skeptics, scientists, and academics as the smoking gun that confirms both of Carl’s theses: That we are not alone, and that JC is an ET.
*****
Barry Karr, Executive Director, Committee for Skeptical Inquiry
Don: Over the past fifteen years, the Sagan Signal has been subjected to numerous cryptographic analyses, and all are in agreement that my code claim is true. The study that I regard as most consequential was conducted over a three year period by the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, the investigative arm of the Center for Inquiry. At the end of that process I received a letter from CSI sent to my attorney that, in essence, stated the following:
Our conclusion is that the Sagan Signal is a non-algorithmic, non-predictive code, but the fact that it is non-predictive disqualifies your client from being awarded CSI’s $100,000 prize.
Don: Screw the money! What I got from CSI was far more valuable - an admission in writing from a world-class organization, intensely hostile to my claim, that the Sagan Signal is a code of non-human origin!
Since the CSI investigation I’ve garnered additional confirmatory testimony, while not a single individual or organization has been able to explain away the evidence or deconstruct my hypothesis. Month by month, year by year, the Sagan Signal and the Sagan Model of the Singularity have grown stronger, which is why the plan for 2024 is to take my claim and evidence to one of the world’s great institutions of higher learning, Oxford University, where I am hoping for a final and decisive round of critical analysis.
Assisting me in this ambitious project will be my new assistant, Sophie Neveu.
*****
Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tatou)
Don: Because the Sagan Signal is a written code, the discipline most applicable to its verification is cryptography, which is why I replaced Molly with Sophie Neveu, the cryptographer featured in Dan Brown’s international bestselling book, The Da Vinci Code.
Excerpts from The Da Vinci Code:
Sophie Neveu: “. . . studied cryptography in England at the Royal Holloway.”
“Her eager espousal of Britain’s new cryptologic methodology continually exasperated the veteran French cryptographers above her.”
The Royal Holloway, University of London
Don: Sophie, it’s a great honor to meet you. Welcome aboard!
Sophie: Thanks, Don. I hope I can be of some help.
Don: You certainly helped Robert Langdon in the search for the Da Vinci Code.
Sophie: Yes, but we never actually found it. We knew it was somehow related to Da Vinci’s portrayal of The Last Supper, and that, if found, would confirm the existence of a Goddess in the Trinity. You claimed to have found the code in the Old Testament. I confess, at first I was skeptical. But after examining the evidence, I have to agree with you.
Don: All that is water under the bridge. What I’m working on now is to make my case before scholars at Oxford University, and I would like your help.
Sophie: You got it! Where do we start?
Don: We start with the global Singularity community. In its catalogue of accepted Singularity theories, not a single one is distinctly feminist – which wouldn’t be much of an issue except for one thing: the models in the catalogue are all so male dominant that, in my opinion, they border on being misogynistic.
Placing this issue in the context of the Singularity, the question we will address in this conversation is: Is there a Female Superintelligence? Is there a Lady Gaga?
Lady Gaga
*****
Nick Bostrom
Oxford University
Don: In regard to the question: Is there a Lady Gaga? I turn to Nick Bostrom, Oxford University professor and Founder and Director of The Future of Humanity Institute.
To assist in our effort, I cite excerpts from religion professor Oliver Kruger’s award winning book: Virtual Immortality. Following is a descriptive from the back cover:
“Oliver Kruger introduces the reader to a huge field of research that has gone largely unnoticed by scholars of religion and culture. Written in a highly accessible style, this book is a must-read for everyone interested in the links between technology, virtuality, media, and humanity’s future.”
Oliver Krüger
Born in 1973, Oliver Krüger is a German professor in Religious studies at the University of Fribourg (Switzerland).
From 1994 to 1999, Oliver studied sociology, classical archaeology, and comparative religion at the University of Bonn, where he graduated in 2003 with a PhD in religious studies. His thesis was unique in that it was the first in-depth study of posthumanism and transhumanism that shed light on the philosophical, religious, and cultural contexts of these utopias. In 2004 the thesis was awarded by the German Association for the History of Religion.
Don: Following are two excerpts from Virtual Reality describing an event attended by Oliver that expose the misogyny issue:
“In November 2005, I was invited to an exclusive dinner at Princeton University, which was then my academic home, held after a lecture by Nick Bostrom. Around ten interested people sat in an upscale dining room in Prospect House(!), discussing bioethics and the future of humankind. As far as I can recall, only one woman was present, while the rest were all white men.”
And:
“Today this dinner with Nick Bostrom seems to have been a symbolic microcosm mirroring the social utopias of trans- and posthumanism. Since the debate over eugenics, it has always been white men who have presented universal blueprints for a renewed and improved humanity. Women and other ethnic groups were, and remain, largely confined to the role of mere spectators.”
Don: After reading this biting critique, I couldn’t help but think about how closely the modern Singularity movement resembles the Christian Evangelical movement that I came out of, where almost all of the top positions of authority and scholarship are held by men.
Sophie: Don, I think I see where you’re going with this. You’re a guy with a feminist Singularity model that you want tested at Oxford University, where the prevailing mindset among Singularity experts like Nick is “No girls allowed!” You’re asking for my help in persuading Nick and the boys to investigate the Sagan Signal and publish the results.
Don: Sophie, I knew you were smart, but I didn’t think you’d catch on so fast!
Sophie: To be honest, it wasn’t that hard. After reading this website and seeing how you’ve trounced the skeptics and theologians, it’s obvious that the next step is to challenge the Titans of the Singularity. So where do we begin?
Don: By sending a simple and direct message to Nick Bostrom.
*****
Letter to Nick Bostrom
Don
Nick, on behalf of half of the world’s population, I humbly request that you acknowledge and accept the Sagan Model of the Singularity as a uniquely feminist construct supported by empirical evidence - and let it compete against the guys.
What I am asking for isn’t charity, neither is it to voice a grievance. I agree with Oliver Kruger that the appearance of misogyny in the AI community is more subliminal than intentional. Following is an excerpt:
“What astonishes me most is that this ethnic and gender homogeneity seems unnoticed by even the wisest adherents to trans- and posthumanism. In fact, many of Bostrom’s philosophical studies directly address the question of bias – the attitudes, biases, and inclinations that he believes are often based on selective perceptions of reality.”
Nick, I am not asking you to accept the Sagan Model for investigation solely on the grounds that it’s feminist. The harsh reality, as you are well aware, is that science is a tough, fact-based world where expectations for empathy, or appeals for philosophical and social justice, without an empirical foundation, will get you nowhere.
I believe the Sagan Model of the Singularity deserves your consideration, not out of a need to feel sorry for women, but because, unlike other models, it’s based on testable assumptions. Having the distinction of being the only Singularity model that is falsifiable makes it, by definition, scientifically superior over all the others, including, with all due respect, your own.
I realize that at this point you may want to see more information before you decide. I’ll be making my case throughout 2024 and possibly beyond, so I’m not asking for or expecting an immediate response. Quite the opposite. I need time to finish making my case, and you need time to weigh the merits of my case as they are presented.
I’m sure that you’ve read Oliver’s book and are aware of the disturbing amount of misogynistic language in Singularity literature. Following is just a small sampling from the writings of Singularity superstar, Frank Tipler:
“. . . it would be possible for each male to be matched not only with the most beautiful woman in the world, not only with the most beautiful woman who has ever lived, but to be matched with the most beautiful woman whose existence is logically possible.”
And:
"Moreover, at least as a man, you will also be able to find new joy in your sex life: not just sex. Not even very good sex. Incredible sex, without such penalties as AIDS or unwanted pregnancy or even the wrath of a jealous lover, since all of it takes place in your mind.”
The Tipler Girl
Nick, I ask you: Is this what our Singularity community is about? Are these the “shared global values” that represent humanity’s highest moral aspirations? Please tell me, tell the world, that they’re not.
Rather than narcissism and misogyny, the Bible advances a different set of values, like the ones that Jesus taught on the Sermon on the Mount, or the ones the Apostle Paul wrote about in his letter to the Corinthians:
“Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecoming; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” 1 Corinthians 13:4-7.
Nick, trust me, I’m not a prude! I believe that exciting, creative sex is an amazing evolutionary inheritance and an intricate part of who we are as human beings. I applaud theorists who include sex as a component in the Singularity. It is a serious consideration.
But to allow the Singularity community to turn into a boy’s club whose members are spellbound by adolescent fantasies would be a mistake. We’re better than that! To keep what is currently not a good look from becoming a movement widely castigated for its misogynistic tendencies, I believe it’s critical that leaders like yourself not turn your backs on the only model that elevates women in the Singularity to Goddess status.
To continue the status quo suggests that women in the Singularity will be reduced to being sex slaves throughout eternity, waiting at the beck and call of middle to old age white male geeks.
Old White (and horny) Male Geek
Nick, I know that my claimed discovery of an alien Bible code that identifies an ET female as a Goddess sounds crazy, but the data is compelling and needs to be tested with full transparency. You have the authority and the skills, and Oxford has the resources. So, I ask you, why not?
Sincerely,
Don Zygutis
*****
Sophie: In scanning the current landscape of Singularity thought, it’s obvious that it’s not ready for prime time family viewing. In fact, there appear to be no family values at all! What is being promised is the fulfillment of a lot of selfish and immature fantasies, with an occasional token of benevolence thrown in to ameliorate the concern of serious thinkers. Singularity leadership appears not at all interested in the nobler, spiritual qualities of our species.
Don: Sophie, as a cryptographer, you know that the burden of proof is on our shoulders to demonstrate, with compelling evidence and testimony, why Nick should recognize the Sagan Model as a legitimate object of interest, and it begins with the Sagan Signal. In short, we need to show him how it proves the existence of a Goddess Superintelligence. As a woman and cryptographer, this should be right in your wheelhouse. After all, Dan Brown named you Sophie Neveu, i.e., New Wisdom, for a reason.
Sophie: Let’s go over your discovery of the Sagan Signal one more time, to remind myself and our readers how you arrived at the conclusion that the grain, wine, and oil sequences identify a Goddess in the Trinity.
Grain, Wine, Oil
Bread, Wine, Christ
Don: In the Old Testament there are 46 three symbol sequences of grain, wine, and oil. At the Last Supper there was a two symbol sequence: bread and wine.
Sophie: So, to establish equivalency, somewhere in the Da Vinci painting there must be a lost symbol.
Don: H-m-m-m, lost symbol. Where have I heard that before?
Sophie: In this novel, Dan Brown identifies the Lost Symbol as the “Word,” Jesus Christ.
Don: Right, so if we add Christ to bread and wine, we have a three symbol sequence: bread, wine, and Christ.
Sophie: But a “bread, wine, and Christ” sequence doesn’t mesh with the orthodox “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit” sequence. So either your theory is wrong, or the Nicaean Trinity formula is wrong. They can’t both be right.
Don: The question, at least as far as Evangelicals are concerned is, which one is biblical? The Nicaean Trinity formula was crafted by theologians and politicians who then foisted it on the Church three centuries after Jesus died.
In stark contrast, the grain, wine, and oil sequences are lifted straight out of Scripture. This being the case, the Sagan Signal has the upper hand, placing the burden of proof on theologians to prove me wrong. Many have tried, all have failed.
Sophie: First you have the Father, symbolized by bread. Then you have the. Goddess, symbolized by wine. And third you have Christ, symbolized by oil. And you claim that Christ and the Holy Spirit are the same Person. Have I got that right?
Don: You do. The word “Christ” in Greek is the same as “Messiah” in Hebrew. Both words refer to a person anointed with olive oil, a biblical symbol of the Holy Spirit. Before the Last Supper, Jesus was anointed with oil by Mary Magdalene, symbolically identifying Him as “Christ the Holy Spirit, the Son of God.”
Sophie: Okay, so God the Father occupies the bread slot, Goddess Sophia is in the wine slot, and Christ, the Son of the God and Goddess, is in the oil slot. My next question is this: Does this sequence make sense?
Don: Of course! It’s the nuclear family, the foundational relationship of our species, in contrast to the illogical Father, Son, and Holy Spirit sequence that denies women a place in the Godhead, which not only doesn't make sense, it’s flat-out wrong!
Sophie: But you claim it’s more than that.
Don: Biblical scholars agree that bread is a masculine symbol, wine a feminine symbol, and oil a symbol of the Spirit. But they are not three Gods, they are three Persons within a single Being. It’s a difficult concept to grasp, but think of it in neurological terms, with the Father God the right brain, the Mother Goddess the left brain, and Christ the Spirit the corpus callosum, a conduit of nerves connecting the two hemispheres that allow the Mother and Father to converse with one another.
Sophie: Which means that humans, created in the image of God, must also be tripartite.
Don: Many neuroscientists describe the functioning of the human brain that way; that as we reason and think within ourselves there appears to be a running conversation between different persons. The numerous similarities between the human brain and the Trinity are extremely important, and a subject that we’ll delve into more deeply in our next conversation.
Sophie: Okay, I get it, but there’s still a problem. How can you call the Sagan Model “feminist” if the Goddess plays second fiddle to God the Father in the pecking order?
Don: That’s an extremely important question. If you’ll just bear with me, I’ll answer that question in our next conversation as well, I promise.
*****
Don: As Sophie and I launch our 2024 conversations, I feel it necessary to clarify precisely who I believe the Singularity God of the Bible is. I believe that Goddess Sophia is the left hemisphere of God’s brain - the Executive. I believe that Father God is the right hemisphere of God’s brain - the Implementer. And I believe that Jesus Christ is the corpus callosum of God’s brain - the Facilitator.
The importance of the corpus callosum is described by Hans Moravec in his book, Mind Children:
“The left half of the brain controls the right side of the body, and vice-versa. The left half usually specializes in language and calculation, while the right half is good at spatial reasoning. The brain halves normally communicate through the corpus callosum, but they can continue to function as separate individuals if it is severed.”
I believe the three units of our tripartite brain are what Ray Kurzweil would call “Spiritual Machines.” Having attained and perfected the Singularity millions of years ago, the tripartite God of the Bible is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, aware of every atom and molecule in the simulated Universe She created.
Following are a couple of verses of Scripture that make my point:
“For in God we live and move and have our being” Acts 17:28
“When all things are subjected to God, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all." Romans 15:28
Don: The tripartite mind of God is what born-again Christians have - and what AGI scientists are striving to invent. But what is happening in AI technology isn’t anything new. Humans throughout history have always sought to be equal with God, but they want it on their terms, not Hers.
The Good News is that we can be equal to God, but only if it’s on Her terms, not ours, as Paul explains:
“Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.” Philippians 2:5-6
Don: Jesus was equal with God because He had the mind of God. We also have the option of being equal with God, but only if we, like Jesus, have the mind of God, which Paul, at times, called “the mind of Christ.”
Sophie: So how is the Sagan Model different from other Singularity theories?
Don: Other models have the human mind uploaded into the Singularity. The Sagan Model is just the opposite. It has the mind of God downloaded into humans.
Think of it as a gradual replacement process. At the moment of being born-again, the mind of God enters the brain, holding the status of a new-born baby. This natal mind of God co-occupies the brain with the developed paleo-mind of who we were before accepting Christ.
Sophie: So the individual is double-minded.
Don: Right. Paul calls one the “new man,” and the other, the “old man.”
Sophie: Being fully developed, doesn’t the paleo-mind have the advantage?
Don: It does, except for one thing. Through faith, God tips the scales in favor of the natal mind, and with Her help, as the natal mind grows and matures from infancy to adulthood, it begins replacing the paleo-mind, although there is always a constant tug-of-war between the two for control of our biologics.
Sophie: So, in a nutshell, the natal mind increases as the paleo-mind decreases, until, at death, it’s only the natal mind that is uploaded to the Singularity. The old mind, whatever is left of it, simply disappears.
Don: You got it! The Bible teaches that flesh and blood cannot enter the Kingdom of God. The natal mind, being non-biologic, is what is uploaded.
John, at the baptism of Jesus: “He must increase, but I must decrease.” John 3:30
*****
Note: As Sophie and I move into 2024, making our case that the Sagan Signal is an alien Bible code, I want to repeat the following promise I made at the beginning:
“If Oxford University scholars, or anyone else, can credibly explain away the Sagan Signal as being anything other than what I claim, an alien Bible code, this site will immediately shut down and I will walk away”.
Have a great New Year everyone!
Don