"Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" wrote:
> Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Dec 1998, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> > [snipped lots]
> > > functioning cohesively to produce correct answers. I don't allow myself to be
> > > directed by wishful logic. Even my root supergoal, the Singularity, is
> > > produced by a tight logic chain of minimal length, and I defy anyone to
> > > produce a shorter chain of logic without assuming what they're trying to prove.
> > so, what is this chain of logic that leads you to seek the Singularity?
> > I'm sorry if you've stated it before, i may have missed it.
> > chau
> Or to summarize: "Either life has meaning, or it doesn't. I can act as if it
> does - or at least, the alternative doesn't influence choices. Now I'm not
> dumb enough to think I have the vaguest idea what it's all for, but I think
> that a superintelligence could figure it out - or at least, I don't see any
> way to figure it out without superintelligence. Likewise, I think that a
> superintelligence would do what's right - or at least, I don't see anything
> else for a superintelligence to do."
> Rational Assumptions:
> RA1. I don't know what the objective morality is and neither do you.
> This distinguishes from past philosophies which have attempted to "prove"
> their arguments using elaborate and spurious logic. One does not "prove" a
> morality; one assigns probabilities.
I think I like your straight and seemingly elegant use of logic, but I hate the consequences. Then I will not act logically! (considering that particular framing of logic anyway, I'm sure we can discuss the probabilities and the fact you use fuzzy logic and yes/no state)
You must have come across the following argument before, what do you think of it, what logical conclusions do you draw from it:
(from Blaise Pascal) the argument of the bet:
One: if you do not believe in christian god there are two possibilities,
if christian god exists you will go in hell, if it doesn't nothing
Two: if you do believe in god, and it doesn't exist, then there is no consequence, but if it does (finally) exist, then JackpoT!!! you go in heaven.
From a purely logical point of view, you should become a christian.
And, do you currently think that there exist an objective morality?
Manu (agnostic, heavily fed with catholicism when a kid, nowadays cured??? :)
--- "what is the temperature in hell" is funny. Question for probabilities course: how many more religions should one follow to increase by a tenfold the possibilities to eventually end up in (some sort of) heaven? Bonus: atheism does not imply a zero probability...