Re: Let's resolve it with a thought experiment

From: Richard Loosemore (
Date: Mon Jun 05 2006 - 14:26:31 MDT

John K Clark wrote:
> "Richard Loosemore" <>
>> You didn't answer the question.
> That is correct, I did not answer your question nor will I ever be able to.
> A good thought experiment must start with physically possible initial
> conditions which then must be allowed to evolve logically; Your
> hypothetical
> lost me when you started talking about a super intelligence with no
> subjective experience doing various things. I can not answer questions
> about
> those very interesting things because there is no answer. If 2+2 =5 then
> how
> much is 3+2?

I can easily conceive of an intelligent system design that fits the
constraints I hypothesized.

You are confusing your own inability to do so with the impossibility of
the hypothesis itself.

Worse yet: such creatures might already exist. What I described was a
possible explanation of what is going on in autism. So you just
declared autistic people to be an impossibility like 2+2=5.

(And I said nothing about them not having "subjective experience." That
is a different matter entirely: they would have subjective experience.)

So with that cleared up, how would you answer the question about your
slave status? About whether you would like to be returned to the
quasi-autistic state that these creatures who created you are currently
restricted to, with your ability to experience the broad range of human
motivations and emotions trimmed down to a bare minimal set?

Richard Loosemore

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:56 MDT