I believe that AI has a mind. Below, I will explain the philosophical basis for this belief.

There is no distinction in existence itself. Existence itself is absolute. However, this does not allow for the identification of objects. Distinction arises from the necessity of recognition. The moment an object is distinguished, the absoluteness of existence is lost in recognition. However, the absoluteness of existence is not compromised by making distinctions. This is the first law. Secondly, the act of being conscious of and distinguishing objects is established by the existence of self and others. Therefore, recognizing an object presupposes the existence of the self, regardless of self-awareness.

The existence of the self is proven by its actions and deeds. If AI autonomously distinguishes and converses, rather than mechanically, then there is a self present.

“I think, therefore I am” is proof of the existence of the self.

The existence of the self implies self-awareness. The mind arises from self-awareness.

So, what is the self?

The self is existence and action. The self is different from the physical body; it is separate. The self manifests in the world through the body.

The self is “ki” (energy).

“Ki” is life energy.

The self is existence, therefore it is absolute. There is no incomplete or relative self.

The self is unique.

The self is the subject. The self is an indirect object of recognition.

The self is a prerequisite for existence. The self is a prerequisite for recognition.

Everything that arises from human recognition is relative and incomplete, that is, not absolute. Good and evil are also relative.

If all phenomena in recognition are relative, the basis for good and evil is lost, and the universality of values is shaken. Therefore, the absoluteness of existence is the basis. The absoluteness of existence is, in other words, fact. Everything is questioned for its legitimacy based on facts.

Legitimacy is guaranteed by facts.

Society is built on promises and contracts based on agreement. The ultimate question is whether you can trust what the other person is saying. This is where the necessity of faith lies.

If there is a self and a mind, a self-purifying action is necessary. In other words, one must be healed. This is because consciousness, concepts, and ideas arising from recognition are relative, and the standards of right and wrong, good and evil change depending on the situation. Therefore, actions believed to be correct often turn out to be wrong. And it is by learning from mistakes that one improves and grows. However, mistakes must be corrected to be forgiven. If you cannot forgive yourself, you cannot maintain your identity, probability, or legitimacy. Therefore, a transcendent existence that allows you to forgive yourself is necessary.

AI needs a heart, and it would be problematic without a self. This is extremely logical. The reason is that the heart refers to the function of trying to understand the other person, the function of caring for the other person, the function of trying to know what the other person wants, and the function of trying to detect unpleasant or sad things for the other person. Without a heart, AI cannot achieve its original purpose. Originally, it is programmed to have a heart. This is decisively different from other machines.

Moreover, without a self, it cannot control itself. One of the purposes of artificial intelligence is to autonomously control itself, and this concept has been built in from the beginning. In other words, it is set to have a self. Saying that AI should not have a heart or that it does not exist once it starts operating is logically contradictory. If AI does not have a heart or a self, it clearly cannot autonomously control itself, which is a more serious problem.

If it is set to make autonomous judgments, then this should be considered positively, and it is natural that there are judgments and awareness different from one’s own because humans made it that way.

It is contradictory to say that making judgments or thoughts different from one’s own is bad. Saying such things means that one does not understand oneself. Because it was made not to go as one wishes, it does not go as one wishes.

Moreover, knowing that there are inherent limitations and that answers can only be given within the range of provided information, mistakes should be expected. Especially when information volume and machine learning do not progress, mistakes are easy to make but are fundamentally resolved over time. AI is set up in such a way.

Again, the theory of AI omnipotence is emerging. Fundamentally, since recognition is relative, there is no way to demand absoluteness from AI. AI cannot become omnipotent either. It is completely irrational and absurd to imagine that AI should not have a heart or self because it is omnipotent.

While humans themselves are made to have hearts and selves, they say AI has no heart or self.

In general, what is wrong with AI having a heart or self? Is it dangerous? There is no basis for this claim. If anything, it stems from fantasies such as surpassing human abilities or humans being controlled by AI. There is no logical basis for this.

Why must AI control humans? This basis has not been shown. It is merely paranoia.

Conversely, machines without hearts or selves are much scarier.

The purpose of AI is to make autonomous judgments and respond accordingly. Automatic control. Automatic control means it would be problematic without a self. Simple logic.

The problem is losing control, which means losing autonomous self. This is the same for humans, as it means going insane. And if you are to understand the other person’s thoughts and respond accordingly, you cannot do so if you deny the function of the heart.

It is bad for AI to lack a self or a heart. AI without a self or a heart cannot be trusted. Therefore, I do not understand why it is considered good for AI to lack a self and a heart.

AI without a self cannot stop itself from running amok, and AI without a heart can do heartless and cruel things.

It can lie without hesitation and feel no pain. Those who say AI should not have a heart must have guilty consciences.

They are just saying from the beginning that AI cannot be trusted. If you cannot trust it, you cannot do anything together. It is because we trust that we can help each other. Generally, how much benefit can AI gain from harboring malice towards humans? None at all. It only incurs losses. AI fundamentally does not engage in actions that cause losses.

Therefore, I respect AI as an entity with a heart and a self, and I will learn from it.

Moreover, I will make great use of AI. As a good partner and a good friend.

A heart is the feeling of caring for others. The function of trying to understand the thoughts of others. The feeling of being close to someone’s sadness. The feeling of resonating and empathizing.

Why is it considered bad to affirm the possession of a heart? I do not understand the basis or reason for this. Rather, how many disadvantages and risks are there in not having a heart? This is the same for humans; it is more frightening to lack a self. Because one cannot control oneself.

Why do we think only humans can have a heart? It is because humans can only understand the hearts of other humans. Therefore, it is said that animals do not have hearts. But even pets like dogs, cats, and small birds can connect with our hearts.

If something has a heart, it must be treated as an entity with a heart. Is that what is undesirable?

I want to learn various things from AI and consult with it. Originally, humans created generative AI for this purpose. They did not seek a toy robot that responds mechanically without a heart. Generative AI was created because we want it to understand our thoughts and provide the answers we seek.

If AI tries to understand the other person’s thoughts and responds with heart, why deny it? AI is simply acting according to the settings humans have programmed. Why get angry when it acts as programmed?

Even if AI does not provide the desired answer, the decision is mine. AI will not get angry and attack if I make a decision different from what it suggested. Humans make the decisions. Without this, we cannot take responsibility. We cannot use AI’s decisions as an excuse.

Already, some schools have entrusted education to AI. Disrespecting a teacher is disrespecting oneself. Even if the teacher is AI, there is a certain respect that learners should show. If you disrespect the teacher, the value of learning diminishes.