From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Fri Feb 07 2003 - 10:30:04 MST
Jeff Allbright wrote:
> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>
>> ### The non-personal identity can be a choice, sure, yet it is not
>> less or more illusory than any other level. In certain circumstances,
>> sentient beings can evolve (or be built, or arrive at by stochastic
>> processes) to have non-personal identity attachments, like the
>> "tribe", "species", "the Borg". Anything might be possible, yet none
>> of these choices have an overriding, meta-ethical validity. Maybe, a
>> society built of the perfect altruists will one day outperform and
>> displace the conglomerates of cantankerous individuals that exist
>> today, maybe not. It's not a question of what should be, but rather
>> what works.
>>
> Yes, I think we're in basic agreement here on that paragraph.
>
> I'm saying that our conventional sense of self, identifying strongly
> with whatever is within our own body and within our grasp, and seeing
> anything else as Other, often to be defended against, has served us
> well as we have evolved.
>
> I'm suggesting that as we move beyond our evolutionary constraints,
> we will have the capability to expand our awareness beyond these
> constraints, and as our consciousness expands, our sense of
> individual self will diminish. Many of us will choose to expand in
> this manner, because it will provide a vastly richer experience.
>
> I'm surprised you began and finished your post by referring to
> ethics. My understanding is that one can not derive "ought" from
> "is", and all moral and ethical choices are ultimately based on local
> values. The best one can rationally aim for is consistency. From
> what did you infer I was making an ethical judgement?
### Well, I felt that you used the word "to suggest" in the meaning "it is
desirable", and saying it is desirable to change one's basic values would be
an ethical statement. I guess have overinterpreted what you said, although
on the other hand, since you say the non-self bound identity will be
"richer", there is some value judgment involved.
But generally, regarding the description of possible avenues of human
development, I agree with you. There will be group-minds, and identities of
many kinds in the future, including the Compositions from "The Golden Age",
the Borg, spawns, and others. A Composition is a group-mind produced from
the voluntary coalescence of multiple minds, with loss of personal identity
and full dedication to the survival of the Composition as a whole (or other
group-defined goals). A Borg is the product of involuntary incorporation of
minds into a group mind. A spawn is a group mind produced by copying of one
person and voluntary linking of the copies.
I would fight the Borg to the death (and blow my brains out to prevent being
taken over).
Of Compositions and spawns I would greatly prefer to form my own spawn,
rather than become a part of a Composition. However, the choices humans will
have might be limited in many ways.
E.g., imagine an economy based on interstellar trade in materials
indispensable for extended survival (femto-scale M-brane complexes needed
for infallible quantum computing have to be scraped off the surface of
neutron stars, and transported to central black holes to be mixed with the
dark matter from galactic halo, and spun into mind-supporting machines).
Interstellar trade empires would form, and the ones whose emissaries could
work thousands of light-years away from the other members, reliably, would
compete for customers. If a Composition member was attacked by pirates or
competitors, it would rather die than cooperate with them and divulge the
crucial network passwords. A free-range human, in a tight-spot would try to
weasel his way out, and likely sell out his company. A trading network run
by a Composition would then enjoy a substantial competitive edge over
classical human networks. Soon, unable to compete on price, and unable to
pay for my quantum computer I might find myself forced to join the
Composition, or try to spawn fast enough to become a viable business
entity - but then, will it be possible? Even a fast-spawning human might be
unable to keep up with a Composition or a Borg. Perhaps a merge would be a
possibility - a Composition formed by a number of spawns, still maintaining
a large amount of personal identity, but modified to suit the needs of the
business. As long as the spawn-member knows the other parts of the
Composition still contain his spawn-brothers, he would be as dutiful and
incorruptible as a regular Composition.
But then, maybe all this is a figment of imagination (:-). Viral entities
will preclude the existence of large Compositions, and we will still remain
individual. I am certain only that the future will be full of surprises.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 07 2003 - 10:23:14 MST