From: Greg Burch (gregburch@gregburch.net)
Date: Wed Jun 27 2001 - 07:03:43 MDT
[A rather hurried and stream-of-consciousness reply to Robert's observations
on Waldemar's recent writings.]
I have two problems with your message, Robert. You write:
> - "psychological needs" are entirely a product of evolution --
> once we have our "hands" on the dials the "conventional" needs
> become irrelevant (i.e. Waldemar's/Daniel's perspectives are
> *only* relevant for either (a) the next 20-40 years a most; [snip]
If the many observers who say so are right, we are on the verge of a
dramatic acceleration of change that is truly unparalleled in human
experience. Your reference to "20-40 years" presumably refers to that
period. To me, saying that the concerns Waldemar expresses are "*only*"
relevant to that period is like saying that the brakes on your car are
*only* relevant to the time when you want to slow down or stop or that food
is *only* relevant to those times when you may be hungry. In other words,
all the dreams of a post-human future must pass through the eye of the
needle of this crucial period of super-acceleration of change and progress
and that the nature of that post-human future, if any, will be critically
dependent on HOW we deal with it.
I understand that for some people this nearer-term prospect is less
interesting and exciting than what MAY follow but, once again, I warn
against the seduction of the idea of technological inevitability. As I
believe Gus Grissom is quoted as saying in "The Right Stuff", "No bucks, no
Buck Rogers," and right now, the flow of bucks is controlled very much
within the context of a social system that has not yet by any means embraced
your vision of a post-human future.
The point? We are just now entering what I call "the white water period".
We need to be mindful of our line through the rapids.
Second, you say:
> - The concept of "a hermit's life in isolation" is the "ground
> of being" for advanced civilizations in the universe.
and
> If we are the first species to encounter the singularity (which I'll
> freely admit the jury is still debating), then there are more than
> enough Brown Dwarfs to allow each of us to become an SI. In that
> situation all of this discussion of "society" & "economics",
> "affection" and "approval" becomes pretty irrelevant.
I do not believe that we have the slightest basis for positing the
possibility of consciousness outside of a social context. I am personally
deeply suspicious of the notion of some kind of abstract "general
intelligence" divorced from context and, most especially, divorced from
social context. I find such ideas to be, in fact, exactly the kind of
"cyber gnosticism" of which Waldemar and Anders have been critical lately.
Sure, we have examples of domain-specific information processing, but the
quest for an abstract general intelligence divorced from context is
precisely the kind of Platonic idealism that has hobbled the AI community
since its founding.
It is only in the last 20 years -- and especially the last 10 -- when some
researchers have begun to develop truly CONTEXTUAL and social AI systems
that we have begun to make what I think we can call real progress in the
quest to build true synthetic minds. I predict that the greatest single
insight we will gain in this quest is that consciousness is in fact an
inherently social phenomenon and that, even alone, the workings of a
conscious mind is the activity of a social machine turned in upon itself.
As Robin Hanson has so cogently pointed out in his essay "Dreams of
Autarchy", there really is no basis for believing that we can live in
isolation.
The point? We cannot escape from the challenges of life in society. Even
if you are right, Robert, and the ultimate fate of consciousness in the
universe is that each star that spawns the spark of conscious life ends up
as an isolated island, those islands will be societies, for we are each of
us societies within, a reflection of the social context that gives birth to
the mental life we experience.
Consider the pathology of autism . . . Even if we do make it through the
rough water of history that likely lies ahead and manage to husband a
quickening of consciousness to a vastly expanded state beyond our current
being, that expanded mental environment will be myriad itself, or it will be
autistic. And in that myriad will lie the same challenges of life in
society -- no doubt expressed in new ways; but still the basic challenges of
moral decision and cultural exchange will persist.
Greg Burch
Vice President, Extropy Institute
www.gregburch.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:08:18 MST