From: "John Clark" <jonkc@worldnet.att.net>
> Put it another way, there is no
> evidence that if you're kind to terrorists terrorists will be kind to you.
Quite true, in fact they would probably interpret kindness as weakness, and
this would encourage them to further atrocities. That's because terrorists of
the kind we're discussing are infected with the brain disease of religiosity.
So I see why you view the Prisoner's Dilemma as irrelevant here. The tit for
tat strategy doesn't take into account that these religious fanatics are
incorrigible, and require a response which diverges from the humane as much as
terrorists diverge from kindness. To phrase it differently, one cannot treat a
dog with rabies as one would treat a healthy canine companion. Cognitively,
true believers become a separate species, capable of kamikaze behavior. Tit
for tat works fine with Dr. Jekyl, but not with Mr. Hyde.
Were it not for impending evolutionary phase transition, a possible long term
solution might involve a measure of separatism in which theocratic states are
sanctioned to the point of quarantine. But we probably don't have enough time
for that before an ultra-intelligent machine is evolved (or emerges
spontaneously). If UIMs enter a world of religious lunacy and decide to upload
all the lunatics to a virtual paradise (Virtopia™) or a virtual hell
(Microsoft™), depending on their beatific or masochistic preferences, that
would solve the problem once and for all. The important thing is to make sure
brain-diseased theocrats don't get the chance to subvert the emergence of
UIMs...
--- --- --- --- ---
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego, human values, scientific relinquishment
We won't move into a better future until we debunk religiosity, the most
regressive force now operating in society.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:51 MDT