From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Thu Apr 03 2003 - 22:12:55 MST
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> An example of inconsistency is the assertion that God predates all
> physics and existence, yet contains complex dynamic structure, and
> behaves in an anthropomorphic fashion, showing emotions that are the
> signature of sustained natural selection in a game-theoretical context.
You make good points but allow me to kick the tires of a few of
them.
If God were an SAI who seeded this universe within or outside of
a VR then there is no reason God could not contain lots of
dynamic structure while predating the existence within and
perhaps transcending the physics of this particular space/time
bubble. Nothing that exist can predate existence itself as that
would be a contradiction. But all of existence does not have to
obey the rules of this particular space-time universe.
On the emotion thing, I presume you are talking about the rants
attributed to Yahweh/Jehovah and the going-on of some of the
gods and goddesses by other religions around the world? Well,
it is a constructed explanation but there is one beyond myth
(which is probably most of it) that is possible. That is that
some of these tales are about trans/post-humans of another era
and/or species who lorded it over our ancestors. Some of these
tales could be morality plays about what could come of/from some
of us in the future.
> The simplest explanation for memes containing such assertions is that
> they are the confabulations of storytellers who lacked the scientific
> knowledge and investigative mindset to detect the inconsistencies in
> their own stories, and simply made stuff up that sounded good to them,
> while transparently ridiculous from the view of later centuries.
The problem with that explanation is that the human mental
capability hasn't changed a whole lot in thousands of years.
These folks were every bit as capable of detecting the
inconsistencies as we are. So what was a sufficient driver to
keep repeating the same inconsistent myths/doctrines/dogma?
There is no basis for beleiving they were so dumb.
> It is
> conceptually possible that despite such storytelling having a clear and
> consilient explanation as fiction, there is nonetheless some even
> simpler explanation under which it is true. But I am not holding my
> breath.
>
Intersection between a trans/post-human group and our species
somewhere back in history is one consistent alternative.
> Similarly, the successive theological rationalization of such
> confabulations farther and farther away from the original unpalatable
> fictions has produced a great deal of extremely vague spirituality.
If we did intersect with transhumans in the past, it would be
very likely that very garbled versions of what actually
occurred, greatly inflated over time, would result.
Spirituality is not vague but I will admit as a participant and
explorer of it that it can be dangerous. It is not so easy to
keep grounded when wading into it. Much has been build up on
what I will oversimplify as "believe/project then fake it until
you make it". Perhaps that can be more charitably stated as
"project what you wish were true and backfill to show it is true
or make it true" - in short idealized rationalization or
magicking reality into the shape of the ideal.
Frankly, I myself go through cycles where spirituality makes
great and perfect sence alternating with spirituality seeming
like an understandable but doomed and fruitless grand pipe dream
at best. Currently I am in the latter state. Ask me again when
I am in the former, if the cycle continues.
> This vague spirituality allows people with moderate levels of scientific
> literacy to deceive themselves without believing things so blatantly
> ridiculous that they would lose their self-respect. But such defensive
> rationalization is not any more likely to be correct, nor will the new
> fictions produced be able to fool anyone with a higher level of
> scientific knowledge or less eagerness to be deceived.
>
Defensive rationalization? OK, perhaps so. But I am not always
convinced this is the case.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 03 2003 - 22:13:44 MST