[extropy-chat] The Limits of "Property"

Wed Sep 13 08:59:31 UTC 2006

Hi Robert,

  Robert writes:

  ... "You are *wired* to care for children.  Its only recently that the concepts of "consciousness" and "children's rights" have arisen.  They derive in part from a genetic inheritance which motivates us to care for children and those less fortunate than us (human social 'tribe' promotion genes)."

  Yes, that may be true to a limited extent. But IMO, something like compassion (or emotions in general) do not lose value simply because they are ancient or naturally evolved. I still cherish my emotions even if they are an artifact of my imperfect ancestors. Sorry for waxing poetic for a moment but... Aren't our evolved emotions the whole source of our interest and fascination with life? Aren't they the reason that we generally believe that existence is preferable to nonexistence?

  Robert writes:

  "So I *strongly* question whether one can divorce oneself from heritage enough to discuss this from an unbiased perspective!  (Its easier if you have a high Asperger's quotient I think)."

  If the vast majority disagree with you, are you confident that ours is the biased perspective?

  Robert writes:

  "I don't see anyone anywhere arguing that ideas that pop into my head have rights.  I run through hundreds or thousands of them on a daily basis." ...

  I've had similar ponderings. As unsettling as it may be, it may be true that previous "versions" (or "thoughts" if you prefer) of myself were once "alive" and are now "deceased". However, the termination of those older "versions" was not a conscious decision by myself or anyone else. (And I'm not sure about the legitimacy of calling that pruning process an "unconscious decision" either). In any case, nothing at all can be done currently to save the "lives" of the older "versions" of myself. And furthermore, I suspect that the termination of passing thoughts (or "old versions") will always be unpreventable regardless of any technological advancement in the future (but this forecast may just be the result of a limited imagination). Intentionally murdering a separate conscious mind (such as a "copy"), however is entirely preventable, and I hope will be viewed as increasingly unnecessary and inhumane.

  Robert writes:

  "So one is either in the camp that ones thoughts (and presumably anything else that runs on ones hardware) is ones own property to do with as you see fit or you are in the "Thoughts have rights too" camp."

  I think this may qualify as a false dichotomy.

  It all boils down to the question: What kind of future world do we want to give to our descendants? Do we want to create a world that embraces compassion and restraint? Or do we want to create a world where the only relevant currencies are power and violence? The only ethical system we *must* follow is that which is constrained by the fundamental laws of physics. Do we really want to leave morality to *that* blind, cruel taskmaster? I certainly hope not. We can choose to steer a different course. 

  Personally, I'd rather not be a drone in the Borg collective, dispassionately collecting data.

  Maybe emotions aren't so worthless after all  ;-)

  Best Wishes,

  Jeffrey Herrlich

Robert Bradbury <robert.bradbury at gmail.com> wrote:

  On 9/6/06, A B <austriaaugust at yahoo.com> wrote:          I must ask you: Why do you feel that you have the "right" or "entitlement" or "freedom" (or whatever *word* you want to use) to create and/or run conscious, artificial beings on your hardware and then do absolutely anything you want with them - morality being at your sole discretion? 

[snip]

With the "children" case for a long long time they were essentially viewed as "property".  Parents had more children to work in the fields (or because they didn't know how to prevent their conception and $!#$#% nature made the process of creating them so hard to resist).  You are *wired* to care for children.  Its only recently that the concepts of "consciousness" and "children's rights" have arisen.  They derive in part from a genetic inheritance which motivates us to care for children and those less fortunate than us (human social 'tribe' promotion genes). 

So I *strongly* question whether one can divorce oneself from heritage enough to discuss this from an unbiased perspective!  (Its easier if you have a high Asperger's quotient I think).

I don't see anyone anywhere arguing that ideas that pop into my head have rights.  I run through hundreds or thousands of them on a daily basis.  There is an overlord going, no, bad, stupid, push that on stack 7, oh wait -- there's something interesting, etc.  Now the only difference between the ideas popping into my head and those in a child or those in another human being is quantity (number of neurons devoted to them), quality (derived from my installed knowledge base and neural network) and some genetic & biochemical hardware (due to the instantiation in this current RJB body).  I don't see anyone screaming, threatening to throw me in jail or terminate this instantiation because I am abusing, torturing, destroying or otherwise manipulating *my* thoughts.  And I'm sure that some of those thoughts (or a collection of them) would love to assert "But I'm really am conscious!" [1]. 

So one is either in the camp that ones thoughts (and presumably anything else that runs on ones hardware) is ones own property to do with as you see fit or you are in the "Thoughts have rights too" camp. 

This line of discussion is a close relation to the "Can you kill your copies" discussion which was to the best of my knowledge never resolved.  My current working solution is that all of *my* copies going in know that they are subject to deletion -- just as my thoughts are. 

Robert

1. In a voice similar to "But I'm not dead yet!"
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060913/c4ff6df4/attachment.html>