Recent comments in /f/philosophy

JackofAllTrades30009 t1_j3lrqxi wrote

Reply to comment by Symboliboi in The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

If you have more expanded model than go ahead and propose it. Calling something “limited” on its face without even intimating at an improved model is vacuous.

5

JackofAllTrades30009 t1_j3lriu1 wrote

Reply to The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

I’m so tired of this “effective altruism”-adjacent “existential threat” nonsense. The structure and precise operations of the mind are so far removed from the realm of concrete understanding. To state that there will be an “explosion of new types of minds” is meaningless when we cannot for certain enumerate the ‘number of unique types of minds’ (in scare quotes because I think the concept of a typology of minds is inane) in our current world.

As such, we have no ground on which to call this an “existential threat”, seeing as it remains to be seen that ‘artificial intelligence’ (again in scare quotes due to inanity) can even be produced; we have much more closely looming existential threats currently facing our present mode of existence and I am frankly offended at the equation of this non-problem with those such threats.

Also, to break a little with the decorum of this subreddit (though let’s face it I wouldn’t call my response up to this point decorous), it is my opinion that posting one’s own substack in a sub like this is incredibly cringe.

1

RenlyTheLast t1_j3lnl3c wrote

Reply to comment by Gmroo in The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

“Catastrophic communication issues” and “diverging subjectivity of minds?”

So…communication issues because people think differently? Just say that bud, this isn’t English 203 lll

1

[deleted] t1_j3l7hiz wrote

Reply to Anna Alexandrova, a philosopher of science at Cambridge, argues that a “science of happiness” is possible but requires a new approach. Measures such as “life satisfaction” or “positive emotions” can be studied rigorously. An underlying variable of “happiness” cannot. by Ma3Ke4Li3

The moment we find the right mix of drugs and neurotech to reliably engineer happiness we'll realize what a shallow goal it was all along.

1

Gmroo OP t1_j3l4zgi wrote

Reply to comment by lizzolz in The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

The post elaborates on it. I just tried to think the logical consequences through of what happens when you introduce basically alien minds into a civilization that for 99% caters to one. Dystopian or not, it is what it is.

3

kgbking t1_j3l3lzv wrote

Reply to comment by Excellent_Fig3662 in The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

>The real problem is going to be what it has always been, lack of equality, justice, intelligence within the social order

A lack of a sense of community too.

Rampant individualism goes hand in hand with inequality, injustice, false consciousness, etc.

5

Gmroo OP t1_j3l256o wrote

Reply to comment by lizzolz in The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

Once we create new minds they will be so different that all communication will breakdown and we won't be able to predict each other's behavior or states.

Like if you cry now I can make the reasonable assumption you are sad or pain. Tremendously many assumptions like this one we take for granted because we're all humans and the diversity is quite low compared to a civilization that builds new types of minds.

So I argue this is a disaster waiting to happen.

2

Gmroo OP t1_j3l1wgp wrote

Reply to The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

The summary of the abstract, by ChatGPT:

The intersubjectivity collapse refers to the breakdown of social and cultural norms in a civilization due to the proliferation of minds of different types and subjectivities that cannot communicate or coexist.

This will lead to conflicts and power imbalances, and make it difficult or impossible predict the actions of others.

It's likely to occur in any society that significantly modifies its own minds or develops artificial intelligence, due to the vast range of potential mind designs.

To mitigate this risk, it's necessary to anticipate it by developing strategies for managing diversity of minds and working on imagining how to cooperate in a civilization of very different types of minds.

2

rvkevin t1_j3l1a23 wrote

Reply to comment by contractualist in The Utility Coach Thought Experiment by contractualist

If people wouldn't want to be forced to be happy, then it's not the case that forcing the utility coach on people would raise their utility since utility is a direct measure of that individual's wants. However, the hypothetical assumed that forcing the utility coach on people would increase their utility, so your reasoning directly contradicts an assumption of the hypothetical.

1

Gmroo OP t1_j3l0koo wrote

Reply to comment by True_Inevitable_2910 in The intersubjectivity collapse: a collapse of the network of unspoken rules that hold civilization together based on the subjectivity of minds that have created it, due to introduction of vastly new minds that lead to unpredictability of agents amongst each other. by Gmroo

Once we will start augmenting our minds and creating AIs that can participate in society, the subjectivity of these minds will be so different that all of our systems and ways of being will collapse.

These minds won't be able to predict each other. And none of our systems are ready for any of this.

When you think it through, it's a catastrophe about to happen, because we've custom-tailored our world to ourselves..since we're the only dominating species.

It's easy to just shrug at this, because we're so used to things being the way they are.

3