<span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;border-collapse:collapse"> Keith wrote:</span><div><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;border-collapse:collapse"><br>
</span></div><div><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;font-size:13px;border-collapse:collapse">"Question: can you get bored in Heaven?"</span></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse"><br>
</span></font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse">The heaven that was shoved down my throat when I was a kid sounded pretty dull, not least of all because I was told I would never die when I had no concept of mortality anyway. And it was implied I would be sitting around with a bunch of old people who would be ensured safe passage and whose idea of a good time seemed to be sitting around watching reruns of Lawrence Welk on Sunday afternoon. </span></font></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse"><br></span></font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse">But a heaven designed with the knowledge of our need for accomplishment and that challenges us in some meaningful way perhaps wouldn't be. One only has to look at the stories we tell each other to see what we value, and in almost every case something needs to be at stake--usually something very important, like a human life, or freedom, or identify -- in order for us to achieve that 'epic win' that makes us feel it is or was all worthwhile. The question I would ask myself is this: can human beings maintain a sense of wonder and curiosity and a spirit of discovery if there is no longer anything at stake? If we were uploaded into a simulation that ensures our survival under optimum conditions, do those conditions include a sense of mild oppression and a need to pool our resources and work together against a common enemy, whether that enemy be death, disease, ignorance, political ill will, etc? Even a powerful being with in innate benevolence (say what some people call the seed AI) must feel that there is something to struggle against, otherwise there would be no need to be benevolent. And the problem with designing a simulation that way is that it would, at base, be utterly false, because you couldn't tell the consciousness trapped in that simulation the truth: that all their problems were simply designed that way to keep them happy. Therefore all their achievements were false too, because there was nothing to achieve in the first place.</span></font></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse"><br></span></font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse">This is all dependent, of course, on the the concept of </span></font><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;border-collapse:collapse">individual </span><span style="font-family:arial, sans-serif;border-collapse:collapse">human identity. Maybe a human being with rational cognitive process and without individual identity that seems dependent upon and defined by conflict would define happiness in a completely different way. Who knows? My identity is still very sharp, and flawed, and shaped by the pressures that formed it. In truth, my consciousness seems meaured by it, and so it is nearly impossible for me to imagine awareness without it. </span></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse"><br></span></font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse">I find it interesting that the early Christian gnostics were playing around with this idea millennia before the rest of us. The real hero of the old testament for them was the serpent, for it offered Adam and Eve a glimpse of the truth. That the endless conflict and suffering that human beings endured was simply a realistic simulation by a jealous and clever minor God, who had locked them in this physical prison to keep them subject. That is not much different from those who suggest we could already be living in someone else's simulation.</span></font></div>
<div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse"><br></span></font></div><div><font face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="border-collapse:collapse">Darren<br>
</span></font><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Keith Henson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:hkeithhenson@gmail.com" target="_blank">hkeithhenson@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
This seems to have been lost. Using the original thread this time.<br>
<div><br>
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Natasha Vita-More <natasha@natasha.cc> wrote:<br>
> I will repeat what has already been stated: no knowledgeable transhumanist<br>
> would argue that everyone should be uploaded against their will.<br>
><br>
> A human being must have control over his/her right of body, brain and mind<br>
> and no one should coerce any human to evolve/morph/upload.<br>
<br>
</div>I outlined a story where an evil character uploaded a mess of<br>
millennial Christians, I forget exactly why, on the day they had<br>
predicted the rapture. After a couple of weeks they were noticed to<br>
be missing. The cops found them all at home in cocoons plugged into<br>
the net. The story revolves around this poor rookie cop who was sent<br>
into the simulation to inform them that they were not in Heaven after<br>
all, but had been uploaded as a joke. They were offered a chance to<br>
go back to real life. For the reasons Natasha gives, this took their<br>
informed consent, you can't just boot them out of a simulation even if<br>
they had been put there illegally.<br>
<br>
Also they were in a 50 to 1 speed up simulation so as far as they were<br>
concerned they had been in heaven for two years subjective.<br>
<br>
The mechanism used was non destructive, fully reversible so they could<br>
be put back in their bodies, with or without memory wipe of the<br>
experiences. Question: can you get bored in Heaven?<br>
<br>
Lots of story possibilities that I didn't develop even in outline.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
Keith<br>
</font><div><div></div><div><br>
<br>
> Anyone who says otherwise is not a prominent transhumanist (caveat: or has<br>
> an alternative perspective which does not coerce anyone to do anything they<br>
> do not want to do.)<br>
><br>
><br>
> Natasha Vita-More<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: <a href="mailto:extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
> [mailto:<a href="mailto:extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat-bounces@lists.extropy.org</a>] On Behalf Of Alan Grimes<br>
> Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 9:02 AM<br>
> To: ExI chat list<br>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Towards a new transhumanist movement.<br>
><br>
> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties:<br>
> (argh).<br>
><br>
>> Alan,<br>
><br>
>> No prominent transhumanists are arguing that people should be uploaded<br>
>> even if they don't want to.<br>
><br>
>> You would benefit from paying attention to reality for a change...<br>
><br>
><br>
> Look, Aleksei, Lets start with Bostrom. As far as he is concerned, the<br>
> debate on what we should be in the future is long since settled.<br>
> Actually, he talks like a 12 year old who's just discovered boobies about<br>
> the subject. The only question that he will entertain any discussion of is<br>
> whether or not we are already essentially uploads in someone else's<br>
> simulation.<br>
><br>
> Now if you collar any of the "prominent transhumanists" you speak of, sure<br>
> they will croak out "sure sure, the choice is all yours." But when it comes<br>
> to actually making a promise to that effect, they will sternly refuse,<br>
> making some excuse about it being redundant or playing into fears. Well, are<br>
> those fears valid,<br>
><br>
> Furthermore, when someone as offensive as "Extropia D'Silva" starts talking<br>
> about uploading everyone, I'm usually the *ONLY* person to call her on it,<br>
> much less the first. Lord knows what they talk about when I'm not present.<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> DO NOT USE OBAMACARE.<br>
> DO NOT BUY OBAMACARE.<br>
> Powers are not rights.<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> extropy-chat mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
extropy-chat mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><span style="font-family:Georgia, Utopia, 'Palatino Linotype', Palatino, serif;line-height:22px"><span style="font-size:large">"I don't regret the kingdoms. What sense in borders and nations and patriotism? But I miss the kings."</span></span><div>
<span style="font-family:Georgia, Utopia, 'Palatino Linotype', Palatino, serif;line-height:22px"><span style="font-size:large"><br></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family:Georgia, Utopia, 'Palatino Linotype', Palatino, serif;line-height:22px"><span style="font-size:large">-<i>Harold and Maude</i></span></span></div>
<br>
</div>