From: Paul Hughes (planetp@aci.net)
Date: Thu Dec 03 1998 - 21:39:04 MST
"Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote:
> Why do I need a root supergoal produced by pure logic? I don't trust the
> built-in human goal system. Yeah, we can all think of one or two examples
> where it worked the way it was supposed to. Wheee. The rest of the day,
> however, we generally spend fighting someone else's emotions when we aren't
> fighting our own. This is a legacy system from the days of hunter-gatherer
> tribes. Furthermore, it doesn't serve our goals. It serves evolution's
> goals. You may think of yourself as being very cagey and selfish by making
> survival your first priority, but you're just embracing a set of genetic
> puppet strings. The whole thing is arbitrary.
Perhaps it is arbitrary, but your supergoal produced logic is resting an equally arbitrary
evolutionary origins. We can speculate endlessly and wildly about the differences between
built-in human goal systems vs. supergoals produced by so-called "pure logic". I happen
to consider myself the ultimate anthropocentric relativist. Since all we have are our
3-lb pieces of gray matter from which to cogitate these issues, I posit that everything we
can contemplate is a branch of psychoneurology. Thus, lofty ideas like "pure logic" and
the "laws of physics", are really neuro-logic and neuro-physics -which in turn are really
neuro-neuro-logic and neuro-neuro-physics ad infinitum. Von Neuman referred to this type
of singularity of human knowledge systems, which now bear his name. Such Von Neuman
Singularities are essentially knowledge black holes from which our current genetic and
neurological limitations prevent us from escaping. I see such physical/technological
barriers to knowledge to be the greatest motivating factor for becoming a post-biological
being.
In the spirit of Kurt Godel, logic would seem to turn on itself, casting doubt on its
ability to discern reality. I therefore can't help but distrust at a foundational level,
any and all neuro^n-logical conclusions regarding any facet of Universe, including but
not limited to the Singularity. Since in the end, my self-awareness is more certain than
anything else, I choose to error on the side of preserving my existence rather than
loosing it to an arguably greater intelligence. Arguably greater, in that processing
speed and complexity will not necessarily bring about a wiser and smarter entity.
Since I think we are both resting an arbitrary evolutionary influences, all I have left is
my awareness and ability to choose. I therefore choose life over death, control and
participation in increasing degrees of higher intelligence over deletion, self-directed
decisions over unselfish unknowable outcomes.
Paul Hughes
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:54 MST