[extropy-chat] What Human Minds Will Eventually Do

[Lee Corbin]

Russell writes

> Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 10:59 PM
> On 6/30/06, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at tsoft.com> wrote:
> > That's right. Consider boredom, for example. First, recall that it
> > is not a "passive" phenomenon, but rather was specifically built-in
> > to generate a certain kind of uneasiness in an organism. I think
> > that the point of such has been a warning that its ancestors 
> > through trial and error found that lack of certain kinds of
> > stimulation did not lead to sufficient procreation of viable
> > offspring.
> 
> Or as I like to put it: fatigue warns you to conserve energy,
> boredom warns you to conserve time.

Nice way to put it.

> > Well... yes, if there were a /greatest possible happiness/. But
> > there isn't. It must be an ongoing research project of how I 
> > may pass through humanly possible states of greater and greater
> > joy, ecstasy, contentment, satisfaction, and pleasure (and every
> > other pleasant state, such as Eugen's "<wr54334543>")

> So you'd program yourself to be maximally happy no matter what you
> were doing,

Yes, understanding that there is no *maximal* such state, (it being
only just maximal for the moment in question till the tech is better)

> and then also program yourself to spend all your time studying science
> in order to make sure you would in fact do that even though you were no
> happier with it than with staring at a wall? (Not a rhetorical question,
> want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly.)

Correct. Why should my happiness be at all *diminished* by what I 
have happened to choose to do?

> If so, well okay, though I'm not sure I see the point in thus reinventing
> the wheel - why not leave things the way they are, and be happy studying
> science using the existing emotional mechanisms, which seem quite adequate
> for the purpose?

THEY ARE NOT ADEQUATE FOR THE PURPOSE!  OR FOR ANY PURPOSE!

The most pleasant state imaginable to us now is sheer torture
compared to what will be possible!

> Granted there are times when I'd like to be able to flip a switch
> and turn off the emotional content of exhaustion and despair,

Well how can that be all?  Surely there are many times when you
---as an intelligent conscious rational human---want to do A
but B would confer more pleasure.  (My god, what a rhetorical
question!)

> but the scenario you postulate would seem to be one where the
> causes of such negative feelings are generally avoidable?

Not without mood control they aren't.  Often there is either very
tedious work that must be done before I get to the good stuff, or
as I say, often my lower, base instincts prevail over what *I*
really want to do.

Lee