From: Lee Corbin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Apr 30 2003 - 20:52:19 MDT
> The reason i am more concerned with Hell worlds than
> Apotheosis worlds is that in Apotheosis worlds the
> sentients have it easy, they don't need to suffer. Of
> course we can still empathize with beings that don't
> suffer but that's a bit of a waste of our empathy.
> As humans it is natural for us to react more to those
> who do suffer, and to extend our sympathies most to
> those who also suffer the most.
Yes, that's a good point.
> Given what i have said above how our empathy works:
> used towards those that suffer most. Far future AIs
> (assuming they haven't already abandoned their human
> empathy anchors) are going to have some obvious
> problems with this "necessary-ness".
> I'm beginning to think that at some stage, when advanced
> sentients finally reach the state of maximum local apotheosis,
> it might be a very wise idea for them to abandon their
> empathy, at least as we know it in the human form.
I agree. For the very reasons you point out, they *ought*
to abandon their empathy anchors. I would think it possible
to be enormously sympathetic without being empathetic.
(Alas, perhaps some only achieve the former by means
of the latter.)
> I suggest that in order for these future beings to
> keep their anthropic empathy they will have to target
> it elsewhere, to those beings that actually suffer.
> And I see the obvious target of this as the necessary
> cusp of suffering implied by the Level IV multiverse.
Why do you say Level IV here? Wouldn't the earlier
levels suffice? (They're certainly easier for *me*
> All such worlds would be accessible by simulation, so
> the need for advanced beings to express their
> heightened humanlike empathy may end up becoming quite
> a morbid pastime, as beings try to simulate the
> feeling of being in a Hell world and experiencing
> intense pain.
This does indeed seem both cruel and unwise!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:42 MDT