From: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky (sentience@pobox.com)
Date: Sat Mar 22 2003 - 16:18:51 MST
Lee Corbin wrote:
>>
>>It is not necessary to hate something in order to oppose it. What matters
>>it to you if I view Adolf Hitler as a loathsome bug or an abused child, as
>>long as I counter his plans?
>
> It matters how you view someone, that is, whether you
> love them, hate them, or are indifferent to them,
> because ultimately it is your values and the way that
> your emotions interface with them, that determines
> what actions you will take. I think it's a complete
> myth to suppose that one can be driven by rationality
> alone.
I think it's a complete myth to suppose... but never mind. At any rate, I
have in this case already specified the outcome you say you care about;
that I interface with Adolf Hitler by opposing him. Now, giving this, do
you care whether my values and emotions state that Hitler is a loathsome
bug or an abused child?
>>I oppose the punishment of non-punishers; it may be
>>an ESS but I don't think it's a good thing.
>
> You oppose the punishment of non-punishers in general?
> Do you not think that one could easily create a scenario
> in which inflicting punishment on the non-punishers,
> or upon anyone actually, would be the right thing to do?
Heh. You can violate *any* heuristic if you impose the right context. It
boots not that the scenario exists if its probability is a thousand to
one. I am saying that I think the punishment of nonpunishers has given
rise to poor outcomes, and to human emotions that strike me as dark
(emotions which I try to counter within myself, and would advise others to
treat likewise).
It is for this reason that the emotional reaction of "How *dare* you
suggest that Hitler is anything more than a loathsome bug?" disturbs me.
People should always be free not to hate. Perhaps there is even
justification for getting angry at someone who doesn't help fight Hitler.
But to demand that someone *hate* Hitler strikes me as, well, Hitlerish.
This is what I mean by saying that punishment of nonpunishers disturbs
me. Punishment of nonpunishers is also an ESS that can lock in
negative-sum games and despotisms. Dark emotion, dark outcome.
I can understand someone who hates Hitler; I can even understand someone
who hates anyone who does not help fight Hitler; when I see someone who
hates anyone who does not hate Hitler, I worry.
Recently this dark emotion has been running completely wild on the
Extropians list.
> As an example---so that one may understand exactly how
> abstractly I am talking here---suppose that you here and
> now in the year 2003 have three choices with what to do
> with Joseph Stalin, who has (thankfully) been dead 50 years
> and 17 days.
>
> (A) Stalin will get run time in a small cubic centimeter
> near the orbit of Pluto, where he will have ample
> time to reflect on his life's accomplishments, his
> victories, and enjoy vodka at a resort on the Black
> Sea with his chums (portrayed versions of Beria etc.).
>
> (B) Stalin will continue to not exist.
>
> (C) Stalin will undergo punishment for his hideous crimes:
> for each person that he had tortured and who he had
> deliberately murdered, he will be forced to undergo
> some fraction of their suffering, and the suffering
> of the countless families associated with his victims.
>
> What say you? (A), (B), or (C)?
(A), obviously, supposing that humanity has straightened out its own
affairs and that Stalin can no longer threaten anyone, and that it is no
longer necessary to regulate outcomes through the highly inefficient and
intrinsically undesirable method of imposing punishments to regulate
motives. Actually, I wouldn't even take (A); I'd just bring Stalin back
as an ordinary citizen with all rights and privileges pertaining thereto,
including the right to grow up and the right to apologize.
-- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 22 2003 - 16:28:36 MST