From: Michael Roy Ames (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Feb 03 2006 - 11:02:56 MST
George Dvorsky wrote:
> Speculation about the potential differences between
> augmented humans and non-human animals is moot.
Moot? As in irrelavent? I don't see how. There will always (I sincerely
hope) be differences and potential differences between species and within
species, in regards to intelligence, goals and many other attributes.
Dealing with such differences is something humanity already handles in
various ways (eg: laws, social norms). I don't see this speculation
becoming moot in anything but a distopia of eternal sameness.
> Uplifted intelligences, whether they are descended
> from humans, animals, or rocks, will, in a
> Lamarckian process, rapidly accelerate towards a
> common fitness peak.
This might be true if a Lamarckian process was an accurate model of some
process in the world. But, so far, no such process exists. Are you
suggesting one will come into being and apply universally to all "humans,
animals, or rocks"?
> Post-biological intelligences may retain vestiges of
> their pre-post-biological brain (much like we still
> retain the reptilian part of our brain),
Agree. We may.
> but that will ultimately be of no real consequence
> as all advanced intelligences will gravitate towards
> roughly the same mode of cognitive being.
On what do you base this prognostication? And what did you mean when you
wrote 'mode of cognitive being'?
Michael Roy Ames
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT