[extropy-chat] How to be copied into the future?
lcorbin at rawbw.com
Sun Apr 22 23:56:17 UTC 2007
>> > > Since I can't complain about you, then, maybe I can go after Robert,
>> > > who just wrote
>> > Future "salvation vectors" are much more likely to be based upon
>> > "wisdom vectors" rather than "mercy vectors". Wise actions will
>> > save many more people than merciful behaviors, particularly those
>> > directed towards an improbable and unprovable direction.).
>Oh yea, pick on the minority will ya....
There aren't a lot of posts, right now---I just don't have much to work with.
> You, I hope, will note that I am not specifying directions,
> I am simply laying out possible paths.
> > By "salvation vector" are you trying to describe a merit list of those
> > who *deserve* to be saved? If so, then this still smacks of a rather
> > vengeful God who punishes people in the next life for what they've
> > done in the first one.
> God, can we scrap this vector? There is no "god" and there is no
> "salvation" vector".
Well, you're the one who used the term, such things whatever they
are being as you said more likely based on wisdom than mercy.
> Can we put it to rest in this forum, as a thread, forever?
Fine with me! :-)
> Now, completely separate from that, one has a discussion of "who
> deserves to be saved".
Okay: that is not a "salvation vector" which term is now officially
beyond the pale by all right thinking people :-) But we *do* have
a discussion of "who deserves to be saved"???
> I would argue that the "saving" paradigm is a brief intersection in
> the MBrain paradigm. There may be a few moments during which
> the saving of static paradigms is a default.
Translating into my simple-speak, I take you to mean that in the
likely course of evolution of super-advanced intelligence, the
preservation of static programs (i.e. people) may occur as a default?
For a while?
More information about the extropy-chat