= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
PhilGoetz comments on Bioconservative and biomoderate singularitarian positions - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (36)
Do you manage a community of fish, ants, or microorganisms, providing them with a safe and enjoyable environment, and eliminating as much disease and suffering for them as you can? If you have dogs, do you provide them with a wooded 100-acre lot to run free and hunt on?
If not, why not?
Or do you, maybe, have one dog or one cat that you keep locked up alone all day in your house while you're gone?
Even those animals we claim to love - say, dogs and cats - are very much living for our enjoyment. They live according to our convenience, not in conditions they would have chosen.
You wrote, "One can even paint a fairly idyllic bioconservative world where human enhancement is impossible and people don't interact with advanced technology any more, they live in some kind of rural or hunter-gatherer world where the majority of suffering and disease (apart from death, perhaps) is eliminated by a superintelligent singleton."
If it would make sense for that singleton to look after humans that way, it would make sense for humans to look after dogs, cats, and ants that way. And we don't.