From: Ben Goertzel (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Nov 24 2002 - 12:53:17 MST
> > But I think you mean the statement a different way -- you, like
> > Michael Roy Ames, seem to believe that there is some True and
> > Universal Moral Standard, which an FAI will find....
> > Well, maybe it will. I'm not confident either way....
> Neither am I confident of this outcome, but its worth a shot don't
> you think?
Sure.... But I don't know of anything concrete to do right now toward the
goal of understanding whether or not there's a Universal Moral Standard of
some kind. Except for:
a) meditating on it
b) trying to build an AI that can make more progress on the issue than me...
> And as to my belief (or lack of it): I have none. The
> definition of Rightness is just a definition. If it is useful, then
> great! If not, scratch it and try again.
I don't think there's a big problem with your working of the definition ...
but I think the concept does strain the bounds of human cognition &
> However, if
> there is a way to 'ask the universe the question' like: which of
> these 38 options is the most Right? Then, wouldn't that be clear up
> a lot of guessing? (This question is asked only half-rhetorically)
I just asked the universe...
Unfortunately, I couldn't understand the answer it gave me ;-)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:41 MDT