Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Discussions about constructed worlds, cultures and any topics related to constructed societies.
Post Reply
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by eldin raigmore » Mon 23 Jul 2018, 00:53

How would your concultures answer these questions?

Are Artificial Intelligences alive?
I think my concultures lean toward “no”.
Or, they might split the concept of “alive”.
They might say that anything which cannot grow, nor heal, nor multiply, nor reproduce, nor spread, can’t be “biologically alive”.
They might say some AIs are “some-other-adverb alive”.

There might be some among my conpeoples who object, on religious grounds, to the idea that anyone but (The) God(s) can create life, or any living thing.


Do AIs have souls?
I think, even those among my conpeoples who admit that some AIs are alive and some have souls, would insist that those souls, like all souls, are creations of the divine, and are not artifacts of mortal, human-or-whatever beings.
User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4467
Joined: Tue 14 Aug 2012, 18:32

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by Creyeditor » Mon 23 Jul 2018, 14:01

Souls are the thing that I ponder about a lot wrt my conworld. I want vitalism to be true in my conworld (just like phlogiston is a thing there). This means that from my POV and therefore objectively, robots can have a soul, in the sense of 'soul' is the thing that makes humans human and things alive alive *there*. So, according to the Kobardon-spekaing people, a robot without a soul would just be a machine. They know that their robots have souls, because they have scientifically proven the existence of souls and they extracted/synthesized souls from somewhere else and engineered them into the robots.
The Southern people do not know that the robots have souls, but they believe it. They would say that the souls were magically crafted/stolen from somewhere else. Both of these would believe that robots are alive the same way humans are alive.
Two groups might oppose to the claims very strongly on general, but very different grounds: the Bólks and the Slanklam ra takunklam sla. Still, both of them would probably deny the existence of individual souls alltogether. For the Slanklam ra takunklam sla being alive is a more mystical property, essentially being part of the world soul or nature. A robot is artificially crafted and therefore not part of the nature. Also the 'laws of nature' do not pertain to robots and it is not subject to the magic these people use or used to use.
The Bólks on the other hand find loyality and the strive for power to be the defining properties of humans and by extension for all things alive. Since robots lack both, they are not alive, they are nothing but a tool that people can use. The concept of individual soul is also not that prominent, because the idea of individuals is not that important. A robot might still be the property of a nation, which kind of substitues for souls similar to Volksgeist ideas *here*, and therefore a robot might be indirectly part of something soul-like.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by eldin raigmore » Mon 23 Jul 2018, 19:36

Thanks, creyeditor. Very interesting!
User avatar
LinguistCat
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat 06 May 2017, 06:48

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by LinguistCat » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 01:51

At least for one of my conworlds, things might have spirits without being what we would call alive. But they might not be the same as a soul depending on what definition of "soul" you mean. The spiritual element of a human? Obviously not. The spiritual portion of any object or entity? Obviously yes. The sentient spiritual force of a sapient entity? This would probably be a yes.

In any case, an AI or a robot would not have to be "alive" to be sentient or sapient. And something that is neither sentient, sapient NOR alive could have a spiritual component that others could interact with.
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by eldin raigmore » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 02:29

@LinguistiCat; That’s also interesting!
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3201
Joined: Sat 22 Nov 2014, 04:48

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by elemtilas » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 02:51

eldin raigmore wrote:
Mon 23 Jul 2018, 00:53
How would your concultures answer these questions?

Are Artificial Intelligences alive?
I think my concultures lean toward “no”.
Or, they might split the concept of “alive”.
They might say that anything which cannot grow, nor heal, nor multiply, nor reproduce, nor spread, can’t be “biologically alive”.
They might say some AIs are “some-other-adverb alive”.

There might be some among my conpeoples who object, on religious grounds, to the idea that anyone but (The) God(s) can create life, or any living thing.
In The World, matters of spirit, soul, intelligence / mind and being "alive" are not quite as clear-cut as they are *here* in the primary world, where you're either alive or, well, not. Up until fairly recently, it was assumed that people had souls and animals didn't. Humans were the intelligent ones, animals might be clever, but nowhere close to us. I'm of the opinion that the situation *here* is less clear-cut.

There are "devices" that would count as artificial intelligence in The World. It was in the Multiverse Inn that I introduced the Pegopansophicon, I suppose The World's response to the smart phone. You can actually read in the quoted snippet that the Device itself recognises some kind of distinction between its own kind and "living spirit beings" such as biologically alive sophonts.

The Pegopansophicon describes itself as a "Class V Device". Now, in the Eastlands (I guess like anywhere else in the polycosm!) philosophers like to name and arrange phenomena in Lists. A philosopher by the name of Verger Thorfield invented (and named for himself) a List of thaumic and near-thaumic object types. The scheme was intended to define various parameters of these devices and classify them accordingly. For example, a Class I Device includes objects that have been imbued with prayers, blessings or low power enchantments; have little magical capacity different than an unblessed object of similar type and construction; while a Class V Device includes objects that are intelligent and sentient, though not necessarily alive in the usual biological sense. Such objects might could be alive in some other sense.

The highest objects on the scale are Class VII, and involve thaumically created beings; unique and novel living beings that never existed in the World before.

Clearly, the Pegopansophicon behaves like a living being and understands the concepts of existence as touching upon "living spirit beings" and its own nature as an intelligent and sentient being that "might could be alive in some other sense". Most people would probably not consider such a device "alive" in the usual sense. Canash (the Daine keeper of the device in question) I am sure comes to the eventual conclusion that her Pegopansophicon is in fact alive. She talks to it like she would a living spirit being ~ person; she has a kind of relationship with it in which the device seems at turns to defer to her most reverentially and courteously, and at other times seems to enjoy teasing the hell out of her. It seems, for example, to know just when what it is about to say will cause her to blush redder than any apple. For her part, she tolerates the (feigned?) obsequity but also gently chides the device for that trait which I'm sure she sees at incomprehensibly self-demeaning for such a wise and intelligent being!

Obviously, as a (sub-)created object, the works of human hands and intellect, the big religions of the East (Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, the Way) would not consider the Pegopansophicon to be fully alive. .i., it does not contain within it the breath of life, the divine spark. But on the other hand, it not a merely inanimate object, and such a thing must be accorded certain rights and dignities, even if it is not alive. The Pagans are much clearer on the notion: it's a magic box. Get over it.
eldin raigmore wrote:
Mon 23 Jul 2018, 00:53
Do AIs have souls?
I think, even those among my conpeoples who admit that some AIs are alive and some have souls, would insist that those souls, like all souls, are creations of the divine, and are not artifacts of mortal, human-or-whatever beings.
As to whether the Pegopansophicon has a soul...

That's a much deeper question that theological philosophers have long debated and considered. There are plenty of devices and artifacts that behave like and exist in a similar in-between-world as does the Pegopansophicon. There is, for example, the terribly famous Perspiculum of Queen Noory the Wise. It too is a Class V Device, and it too seems to behave as if it's more than the mere sum of its parts.

For example, one of its properties was to show the viewer a true image, not the reversed image you'd see in an ordinary looking bronze. In other words, the Perspiculum is showing you what it itself sees, not merely what is reflected from outside. In other words, if you have a Sun tattoo on your left cheek, when you look into the Perspiculum, you'll see the tattoo towards your "right" side, rather than your left. Unlike the Pegopansophicon, who lives to serve its keeper, the Perspiculum seems to have its own policies and keeps its own counsel. A person who comes to the Gate of Mirrorworld and treats with the spirit within properly can be rewarded with great knowledge and insight into the doings of the world. But Mirror Mirror on the Wall isn't your friend or happy guide. If you come to it with a weak mind or vain spirit, if will feed you vanity and falsehood! And it will trap you in its wiles until, like Noory's granddaughter Semlan the Vain, you become a slave to the Mirror. (Now, mirror magic has that effect in general, but the Perspiculum is both cunning and powerful; it's like an ordinary looking bronze on the hunt of new prey.

Mirror, Mirror, brook no coddum,
Show me here and show me there,
Show me she who is most fair,
Semlan bids thee, thy true madam.


Are these things living beings with souls and spirits as well as cunning and intelligence? Can it be that a Mirror or a really smart smart device can obtain or be endowed with soul? Was it there from the beginning of its conception in the mind of the artificer?

I think those are questions I really don't have an answer to!, for all the wrangling and haranguing of the philosophers.

I can say that I'm sure Canash believes her Pegopansophicon must have a soul. It's obviously alive in some curious way and intelligent. It's basically a person in a box. How can it not have a soul? Good and gentle soul, that Canash!

I can say that I doubt Queen Noory ever came to a conclusion as regards the Perspiculum: being an inquisitive, intelligent and formidable woman herself, she must undoubtedly have wondered at the nature of this thing that hung on the wall of her palace. It is an intelligence unto its own, a thing that can be talked to and reasoned with, that can be petitioned; but also a thing that has its own ideas and may choose not to cooperate with an outside petitioner. I don't think her relationship with the Perspiculum was as intimate or probing as Canash's with the Pegopansophicon, thus hampering any further clarification in that direction.

I can say without a doubt that Queen Semlan did not care one way or the other what the nature of the Perspiculum was. Her goal was wealth and power, to enflame her own sense of vanity. To her, Mirror was but a tool. Had she cared a little more about the nature of her Mirror, she might have realised before it was too late that it was she herself who was being used as a tool. And to her own destruction.

I think these two devices are much more person-like than most actual people are willing to accept or admit or even consider. If they have souls, then, like the Men that made them, they must be most curious unliving soul beings indeed!
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by eldin raigmore » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 02:58

@elemtilas;
Stories! Great!

Thanks!

——————————

Edit: BTW: Some AIs in my conworlds can grow and/or heal and/or reproduce, “for certain values of those terms”.
Some of my conpeople would allow that those AIs, if no others, are “biologically alive”.
User avatar
gestaltist
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1707
Joined: Wed 11 Feb 2015, 11:23

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by gestaltist » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 11:11

Great prompt! The answer would differ depending on the conworld for me.

In Golempunk, the closest you have to AI is golems which are created by infusing them with a soul before it manages to reincarnate. So they definitely have souls. However, almost nobody in the world would consider them to be truly alive.

In the World of Twin Suns, there are no AIs and no true equivalent. However, souls are an imprint made on the spiritual plane by the physical plane in that conworld. So if AIs existed, they would generate souls, yes.

In Colonial World (never mentioned in this sub so far), there is magitech based on occult symbols (to make things simple). There are machines based on that and they are likely to figure out how to build AIs in the future. If that happens, they wouldn't have souls but they might be considered alive.

On Floating Islands, there are some animated statues/golems but they don't have a soul and wouldn't be considered alive.

EDIT: can't believe I forgot the one world I have with actual AI. On Craterworld, the only active AI is the orbital station which fulfills the role of the moon of the planet. Some locals think it's simply a celestial body, some think it's a deity. Nobody actually suspects it of being AI because the concept has been lost to time.
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon 19 Sep 2011, 18:37

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by Salmoneus » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 11:57

My concultures do not generally have advanced computing. In my main SF setting, they do have advanced computing, but have largely retreated from advanced AI and computer-networking as security risks. They do have some fairly sophisticated computers operating, for example, unmanned mining installations, but nothing sapient or self-replicating.


But in any case, I think the questions are problematic. What does 'alive' mean? And more importantly, what is a soul? You could say "oh, the question is how your people define 'alive'" - ok; but it can't very well be "how do your people define 'soul'", because unlike 'life', 'soul' is a culture-bound concept. If you look at any non-Christian culture - or even a Christian, pre-1800 culture, you'll struggle to pick out the concept analogous to 'soul'. Indeed, i'm not really sure what 'soul' even means today, other than being a mystical relic of earlier forms of speech. [for instance, people often try to distinguish soul as different from 'spirit', although theologically they are generally synonyms]. [The soul is basically the mind that has been progressively stripped of all its distinguishing features]

Every culture will of course have concepts relating to thoughts, emotions, opinions, virtues, self-control, animation, sensation, habits and forms and dispositions and intents, inheritence and ethnicity, social obligations and relationships, relationship to the divine, honour, debt, dignity, rights and so forth. But those concepts are split up in such wildly different ways - even just looking at european history! - that I don't think it's useful to pick out one culture-specific term and ask "what do they think about pneuma?" or "what do they think about soul?" or "what do they think about the Homeric shade?"
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by eldin raigmore » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 14:25

Thanks, gestaltist and Salmoneus. Your posts made good reading!
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 3201
Joined: Sat 22 Nov 2014, 04:48

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by elemtilas » Tue 24 Jul 2018, 22:52

In light of Salmoneous's questions, I'll post an addendum, covering those considerations for the primary world as well as The World.

What is "alive"? --- in order to answer this, we need to ask "within what context are you asking?" We can answer (fairly) definitively from a biological perspective. Objectively speaking, the lion prowling around the zoo enclosure is "alive" because it exhibits all (or sufficient) of the biological markers for being alive, while the stuffed lion in the zoo's gift shop is not "alive" because it exhibits none of those markers. We can answer also on several cultural levels. We speak (at least in the US) of a city being "alive" not because the bricks and concrete are biologically living but because the whole system of people plus infrastructure mimics a living biological system. We say it breathes and has a rhythmic heartbeat and diurnal cycles; it eats and craps and begets suburbs and it rots from cancer and dies from external wounding. We can also answer on imaginative and individual levels. Going back to the stuffed lion, for most adults it's just a bit of rag stuffed cloth. For most children (and for some imaginative adults), it is very much alive, again, not in a biological sense, but because, within the inner world of the imagination, it parallels the life of a lion in the outer world. Finally, we can also answer mock facetiously. We sometimes speak of (and to) cars and machines as living things, half expecting them respond as if. We name cars and refer to them as girls. We speak of electronic systems as having a mind of their own when things get crazy. And as science and technology progress, I believe that eventually we will be truly speaking of "living" electronic systems: things, and perhaps eventually persons, that are not biologically alive.

In The World, as described above, we can see that several of these definitions come into play for a full understanding of what it means to "be living" within its context. We can see there are biologically alive creatures and that there are systems and objects that mimic certain behaviours of biologically alive creatures, but themselves are not biologically alive. Some contexts may indeed be culturally modified. Men would probably not think of the Pegopansophicon as "alive" in the usual senses while Daine most likely would. Even in the usual senses.

What is a soul? --- again, we can look at different contexts. From ancient philosophers to various religions and cults. Humanity has long understood that there is more to life than mere facts of observable biology. Perhaps they think it's some kind of animating force or extension of some kind of universal spirit. Different cultures may understand the concept differently. More objectively, we learn through revelation that the soul is indeed more than the observable, physical sense can identify. The soul is what is essentially us. It's the spiritual part of us, the immortal self that along with the mortal body makes up a human person.

In the World, there has been a long history of study and consideration of what the soul is and how it fits in with the material body. Leaving aside what people believe for a moment, in The World, (most) people are composed of four elements: the mind & the body; the spirit & the soul. The latter two are immortal and come from outside the confines of All That Is to inhabit this place for some time; the former two are native to Gea. The body, of course, is the physical manifestation of the person, while the mind is the sort of "terrestrial soul" of the person -- the seat of thought and memory and emotion and wisdom. These are not permanent, and will shortly after death decay. There is also a "third soul", so to speak, that you'll only meet after shedding your physical manifestation. This is your karmic twin, who is the immortal repository of memory and uniting with this part of you brings a whole new meaning to the phrase "your life will flash before your eyes" because she (or he, depending) remembers every deed done, every word said and every thinking thought.

The body, of course, is the biologically living, mortal entity, the temple of the soul in which the immortal manifestations of a person reside. The mind is the "inner being" of a person: thoughts, dreams, aspirations, hopes, fears, desires. This is the thinking part of the animal: the part that can look up into the heavens and contemplate the wonder of Creation and physically commune with the Creator. The spirit is the animating force, the divine spark, the breath of life. Like a kind of non-physical connective tissue, it unites your mortal and immortal manifestations into one single unitary being. The soul is the true person, the complete essence: it is the form of the person, made by the Creator to abide, through physical life, in the material world for a time.
Image

If we stuff the whole chicken back into the egg, will all our problems go away? --- Wandalf of Angera
User avatar
Reyzadren
sinic
sinic
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun 14 May 2017, 09:39
Contact:

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by Reyzadren » Wed 25 Jul 2018, 23:19

There are AI that could be considered as alive or not, depending on how sentient they are, in my conworld.

Though souls can reside upon an AI, a more appropriate phrase in this context would be "bits of data that would be returned to the universe/source code".
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
User avatar
alynnidalar
roman
roman
Posts: 1036
Joined: Sun 17 Aug 2014, 02:22
Location: Michigan, USA

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by alynnidalar » Tue 31 Jul 2018, 21:08

Hmm.

For the dalar, I imagine their definition of "life" would certainly be tied to whether or not something has amati (that is, a magic force); dalar, humans, and animals all have notable amounts of it, even if only dalar are consciously aware of it. But certainly this can't be the only marker of life; plants contain amati too, if in smaller quantities, and even inorganic matter can hold trace amounts. And even clearly dead organic materials can hold larger amounts of amati for awhile when someone puts it there--bones, pieces of wood, hair, etc. The most we can say is that if something can't contain amati, it must not be alive, and if something is alive, then it must contain amati.

But certainly there is some connection between having amati and being alive. Dalar and humans objectively contain more amati than animals, who objectively contain more amati than plants, who obviously contain more amati than everything else. Perhaps we can say that something must contain an appreciable amount of amati to be considered alive, but where do we draw the line? Are plants considered alive? Are animals??

Of course Sanmran biologists would have their own definitions, likely drawn from or built upon the same definitions human biologists use, but your average Sanmran citizen is likely to draw the line at plants. Dalar, humans, and animals are neiromes 'alive', while plants only fall into the broader category of taues 'growing' (which can apply to dalar, humans, and animals too).

And there's a further question that must be asked: why do only living things have amati? We know that inorganic things--things that were never alive even by human standards--can't contain amati. (a hunk of gold, for example) We know that organic materials that have been through enough processing/changes can't contain amati. (oil and diamonds, for example) But which came first--amati or life? Is life only possible because those types of materials can contain amati? (and thus if you invented a new material that could hold amati, it could become alive) Or is it the exact reverse, that amati can only flourish in places where life is? (and thus if you artificially assembled a cell molecule-by-molecule that perfectly mimicked a real cell, it could never contain amati)

Which is all a big front porch to answering the real question: are AIs alive, in the eyes of the dalar?

And the answer is that it's complicated and depends on how you answer all the questions I've previously posed.

On one hand, AI obviously cannot be alive; a computer does not and can not contain amati (which is believed to be essential to creativity, free will, and thought). On the other hand, if you believe that amati follows life, is it not possible that a computer containing an AI could begin to be able to contain amati? (and what if you create a computer entirely out of organic materials, such as neurons, which can contain amati?) Or might a sufficiently advanced AI undermine our whole proposition that amati and life are inextricably linked to begin with?

I don't have a single answer for these questions, any more than a Sanmran would. (unless they're VERY sure of themselves!) All I can say is that most Sanmrans right now would come down on the "not really alive" side of the fence, and will reserve judgment until we actually have AI that are plausibly living. Definitely not anything we have right now, though.

tl;dr: that's a big ol' "iunno" from Sanmrans, with a side of "probably not tho"
Curlyjimsam
sinic
sinic
Posts: 248
Joined: Wed 01 Sep 2010, 14:31
Location: UK

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by Curlyjimsam » Sat 04 Aug 2018, 11:33

Very interesting thread!

The classical Ninibian conception of a "soul" was the substance sirenu, variously translated "life", "breath", "spirit" etc. Sirenu was an elemental fluid that it was believed to be present in living things (i.e. humans and animals, probably not plants for most people) and absent in dead or non-living things. You die when the sirenu leaves your body, essentially. But beings of pure sirenu were also a possibility - it was often believed that the wind was made up of bodiless spirits - and people's sirenu would live on after death.

Someone of the pre-industrial era, informed about AIs, would probably conclude that they aren't alive because they don't have sirenu. (We know what was involved in putting the computer together, and the substance sirenu was not obviously involved.) But a bit later, especially in fiction but also in some biological thought, sirenu came to be equated with electricity - at this stage barely understood, with only extremely primitive electrical appliances having been invented. A person of that era might be tempted to view AIs a bit differently - if electricity is sirenu, and sirenu is what makes you alive, then a mechanical mind that runs off electricity is alive, is it not? But then so is any electronic machine, not just advanced AIs ...

Present-day thinkers would tend to reject the concept of a soul altogether, though it persists in religious and popular thought. The latter, though, has been increasingly influenced by ancient animistic belief systems, where of course computers have souls, because everything does.
Twitter: @jsbaker750
Website: seven-fifty.net
User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sat 14 Aug 2010, 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by eldin raigmore » Sat 04 Aug 2018, 16:24

Hello again, Curlyjimsam!
User avatar
Pabappa
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 191
Joined: Sat 18 Nov 2017, 02:41
Contact:

Re: Are AIs alive? Do they have souls?

Post by Pabappa » Sat 04 Aug 2018, 21:55

sorry i ahvent read the thread but i want to post while i have the time....
communicating with nature through touch is common in the Ridia religion .... e.g. you talk to a tree by touching the tree, otherwise it cant hear you. all animals & living things have souls. it would follow, thus, that computers also have souls and that people can communicate with electronic devices by touching them./ It is not required for a body to have intelligence to have a soul, as e.g. trees also do. therefore the software is not the soul, the soul belongs to the device the software is housed in. i odnt know how Poswobs would handle the idea of an AI algorithm that can be reproduced onto many devices .,... i'd guess that it would not have a soul of its own because its just information .... similarly, when a child trŕns into an adult they dont gain another soul just by learning's knowledge. likewise, it is not because hu,mans have minds that they have souls ... the soul is present even in early childhood, and during pregnancy, when the embryo dos not have the ability to think independently.

Edit: also, beds, houses, etc have spirits. And I use the words spirit and soul as synonyms. Spirits can change bodies... The spirits of the house will move if a house is destroyed. Spirits bound to manmade objects follow the people who own them, including when reassembled into more than one unit. It is also possible to have spirits residing in objects that are part of larger wholes, like rooms in a house .... a pillow without a bed has a spirit which joins that of the bed when it is with the bed. This also reflects nature, where tree spirits are found in each individual tree, but are all the same spirit and can rejoin each other.
Image
Post Reply