AI at the end of the day is a term that describes a lot of tools that has something in common. Islamic opinion will depend on how you use this tool for. If you are developing a drone swarm that will be used to kill people in the war or if you are developing a robot swarm to help do difficult jobs inside factories. It might be the same concept or technology but the usage is very different from Islamic perspective.

Another example is the usage of famous ChatGPT. A student can use it to correct English mistakes or for some help in their school work or they can use it to cheat and produce the full homework or exam. People can use it to write ans publish porn stories or can use it to help them write a useful book. Islam also put a special important on intent of the action.

Asked a Islamic friend: the consensus is, that it is another tool, like a knife, can be used for good and bad.

Well that's one opinion; bet you can find another option that's totally different

"Islam's opinion" for any given subject is whatever fits the narrative and the common talking points given the current situation.

Ironic considering it's derived from the Quran and Hadiths

Literally anything can be derived from Quran and Hadiths because they are purposefully vague.

What a bewildering statement. Have you actually read the Quran?

Yes, I was forced to read Quran as a child in school in Iran.

Literally no reader says this, because they know how much explanation is needed for the verses to make sense today. There are entire industries providing tafsir.

Please do read it yourself before questioning others with your kneejerk reactions.

I'm guessing you think this because as you've stated elsewhere you were taught in Iran, where they often opt for 'tafsir batiniyya' (esoteric interpretation) as opposed to just taking the texts at their dhahir (apparent) meaning. You might find the works of someone like Ibn Hazm refreshing, since he talks about this sort of thing alot.

The practice of people divorcing texts from their linguistic meaning isn't something unique to the Qur'an, by that logic anything can mean anything and it's very useful for certain people, but since you're obviously able to understand what I'm saying there has to be some underlying structure.

So you think we should take the part of Quran which says beat your wives if they disobey you at face value?

You shouldn't take a 'part' at face value you should take the whole at face value (that is to say, including any other texts that outwardly state what kind of striking people are permitted to engage in), but yes there is a kind of striking of the wife that Allah permitted and anyone who denies this is illiterate or coping.

This is a dishonest Sunni talking point. There is no apparent interpretation of every verse.

Simple example: aleph lam meem.

And verses you can't take literally: 18:85-86.

So apparent just means a regurgitation of the Sunni interpretation.

>There is no apparent interpretation of every verse.

There not being an apparent interpretation of 'alif lam meem' doesn't necessitate an esoteric interpretation, which is what I'm arguing.

>And verses you can't take literally: 18:85-86.

Linguistically it's very clear what the Arabic means here.

>So apparent just means a regurgitation of the Sunni interpretation.

No, it means the most obvious meaning of a statement according to the Arabic.

According to my apparent interpretation: First verse is meaningless. Latter verses are plain wrong.

If you want to make random claims I can't really stop you, idk what you want me to tell you

And this response gets a dishonest "nuh uh it's not" without any justification as expected.

Why would a religion invented 1200 years before AI have any opinions about AI?