From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Tue May 01 2001 - 19:11:55 MDT
"Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote:
> Jim Fehlinger wrote:
> >
> > But how many of us can really objectively believe that we
> > embody a pattern so unique and valuable that we couldn't
> > be replaced by one of the other six billion humans on
> > the planet (or some pattern synthesized from the "types"
> > they represent) without making a dent in the history of the
> > Cosmos? That's not to say it wouldn't be fun to be along
> > for the ride, but that's different -- it's a question of,
> > well, entertainment.
>
> There's another difference between this Earth and an Earth in which we
> have been replaced by six billion arbitrary humans - the latter Earth has
> undergone a major extinction event which violated the rights of six
> billion individuals. Even if the future outcome is more or less the same
> (which it almost certainly would be, from a high-level perspective), the
> total history of the latter Universe is less desirable.
Huh? A non-conscious event like a ten kilometer meteor causing a very bad
day for all, cannot be called a rights violation. There is no conscious
actor. And this has nothing to do with the point being discussed anyway.
But then, I may have lost what the point is as it has taken a couple of
turns.
Personally I don't like the wording and concept of "preserving" human
beings. Nor do I think of personal immortality as requiring preserving this
particular current personality matrix or body. As I said earlier I see it
more as a preserving of the experiencing essence (for lack of a better
neutral word) that will weave itself many personality matrices and wear many
bodies over time. The reason I brought that up is because I have run into
notions from some transhumanists that unless they survive in a form that they
consider is precisely themselves in a much stricter fashion than what I
suggest then they don't really have any indefinite lifespan and all. Some go
so far as to say they don't know what an upload of themselves would be but it
would not be themselves but merely a close relation.
Another reason is because I think it is important to understand that the
*I*, the sense of self needs to be a bit more fluid and also stronger than
it is in many people in order for them to navigate uploading and such
successfully.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:25 MST