|
|
 Originally Posted by Lukie
bold- philosophically I just can't agree with this. just seems like a double standard honestly. how exactly you weight everything is up for debate but if you say that an absence of suffering is good (I agree), an absence of pleasure is inherently bad.
We don't describe things as purely either pleasurable or painful; there is a whole lot of "in between" stuff that is neither and we describe that stuff as "good." We describe things like not having a headache as good but not as pleasurable
I have read futurists like Kurzweil etc. although there is still some doubt in my mind whether or not we will be able to create true conscious AI
As long as the species exists to create the tech, it will happen. Consciousness is just a chemical interaction. As soon as we can create a 3d computer chip with trillions of connectors and pathways, we'll find we've created a conscious being. Consciousness isn't really even about having a brain, but about having a really big brain with so many synapses that it creates abstractions and confuses them with reality.
what you point is beyond horrifying, no doubt, but it also leads into the ability to create a perpetual orgasmic bliss, a sort of man made heaven/hell type thing. better make sure you have your anti-malware software up to date 
I know we've discussed this before, but I think that suffering is unjustifiable. One person's suffering is no more or less no matter what happens outside of that person's experience. Logically, this means there isn't any moral difference between one person suffering and a trillion. If one person died in the Holocaust, his suffering would have been the exact same as it would be when six million others also died along with him
|
Reply With Quote