From: Thomas Buckner (tcbevolver@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun May 14 2006 - 20:32:59 MDT
--- Phillip Huggan <cdnprodigy@yahoo.com> wrote:
> As a memory it is no longer relevant except in
> a weak derivative form. Once the 1st hand
> experience has elapsed it holds no direct
> value. It is the experiences of conscious
> actors *in the present* that give the universe
> objectivity. Morality pertains to how you use
> the resources under your disposal to affect the
> experiences of the sum of conscious actors in
> the universe.
> I don't give a shit whether your innate or
> environmental or (self-)educational (the
> biggest biases for better or worse are found in
> the learning category) value biases recognize
> others or merely yourself. But the fact that
> you are selfish does not mean there aren't
> others who are benevolent. It certainly
> doesn't mean an AGI can't be programmed that is
> or behaves like it is benevolent. This isn't a
> list to seek existential meaning.
>
>
> m.l.vere@durham.ac.uk wrote:
> 'The searing pain' now exists only as the
> memory to which i am refering.
>
> Would you please prove to me how
> altering/affecting the CNS of *other* people
> causes an objectively moral action - or why i
> should care (other than in terms
> of reciprocity).
As I understand it, memories are physical
structures in the brain and are in some respects
physiologically treated as if they were real and
present sensations (this is a tenet of NLP, borne
out by experiments; vividly imagining an even
that has not happened also activates brain
regions as if it were real and present; the
easiest way to envision this is to recall the
quickening heartbeat you may have felt watching a
horror film or something a little more
adult-oriented). Recent experiments also suggest
that we have brain structures devoted to modeling
the emotional states of others; sociopathy may
result when these structures don't work properly.
Persons who do not empathize well can be very
effective competitors, thus succeeding
reproductively as individuals, but may either
harm or help their social units competitively.
Notoriously, Ghenghis Khan has 13 million
descendants. On the other hand he left
once-wealthy Central Asia bankrupt and backward
ever since.
When you come right down to it, morality...
Actually, I prefer the word ETHICS! because
ethics refers to how you treat others while
'morality' tends to mean whatever ill-conceived
ersatz the speaker may have sneakily substituted
for ethics, e.g. 'Absolutely no sex unless in the
male-female marriage bed for the express purpose
of making babies!' How many times must I say this
before someone notices I said it? This list is
supposed to be all about rigorous, precise
thought, yet this muddy term 'morality' will not
go away.
In any case, to finish that unfinished sentence,
ethical behavior is a remarkably efficient marker
of intelligence in many cases. In fiction, it's
the rogue who is interesting, but in real lfe
it's usually the ethical actor who is ultimately
more interesting, since hir interests are more
interesting than self-aggrandizement and power.
This is not to say that a superintelligent being
will be a tender-hearted milksop, but I would
expect hir to find any needless cruelty
uninspiring.
This is why I do not fling gratuitous insults at
the other idiots on the SL4 list
ehehehhahahahahh! ;-D
Bottom line, as I see it: if one chooses
nihilism, so be it, but it's an all-in bet. To
see what happens when a true nihilist loses this
ultimate bet, I refer you to a DVD of 'Downfall'
starring Bruno Ganz; it's very good.
Tom Buckner
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT