= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
shiftedShapes comments on Is suicide high-status? - 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 (81)
If someone is already considering suicide, helping them contemplate the topic from many aspects will increase the probability of really doing it. I don't have a good estimate about how much the probability would increase, but my guess is that the expected damage is far greater than expected benefits of having this specific discussion.
For me this topic is kind of a taboo. In theory, there is nothing wrong about discussing suicide between psychologically stable people. The problem is, depressed people usually don't see themselves as unfit to participate in such a discussion; they are probably even more likely to start it or join it. I don't want to participate in possibly providing the last straw for someone.
The article itself is not the whole risk; the comments (assuming the article starts a large discussion) would be a greater risk. The more different perspectives, the higher chance that one of them would impress a fragile mind.
The majority of posters here are in the prime demographic to suicide, and are indeed susceptible to arguments in favor of far-fetched premises without evidence, i.e. revival of cryonicists by a machine intelligence. However, their strong belief in this prospect will insulate them against suicide attempts just as devout Christians are protected by their belief that hell awaits suicides and that heaven is possible for those meeting a natural end.
Did you mean that the posters are drawn from a demographic which has suicidal tendencies (young adults), or that Lesswrong is a demographic which has a higher proportion of people with suicidal tendencies?
Young males, often single, that is the demographic (though I believe that IQ is inversely correlated). Religion is a protective factor, and though singularitarian is not a recognized religion (though SIAI is tax exempt) its adherents hold beliefs that should have the same effect as those held by more orthodox believers.
Not necessarily. One of the big protective aspects of religion is its community. Singularitarians, by vice of their small numbers, have less of that.
That may be part of it and im not sure if it was controlled for but the study i read specifically focused on the beliefs, for instance do you believe suicide is morally wrong, do you believe in hell. Of lesswrongers they could ask do you believe in resurection through cryonics, or another possible question: does a babyfucking await anyone who commits suicide rather than maximizes the chances for FAI.
In many cases, religions provide a being/entity/cosmic absolute/"intrinsic property" which is
Outside of conventional human understanding
A source emotional significance, labelled "transcendent"
Emphasizes emotional experience of the transcendent over intellectual understanding, due to it being outside of conventional human understanding anyway.
Do singularitarians have a such a "transcendent constant"? Is there an "instrinsic property" which was compatible with hard materialism? What would a "cosmic absolute" be? What would "babyfucking" be?
Yes, that transcendant focus is the weakly, and eventually strongly, godlike AGI! Babyfucking is what awaits those who know it needs help to come to fruition and instead do less than their best to make that happen. Suiciding would be a great shortfall indeed. More minor sins, resource misallocations, may be forgiven if they are for the greater good. For example I could donate $10 to SIAI or I could see a movie. The latter will lead to eternal damnation, I mean babyfucking, unless I believe that the purchase will enhance my ability to contribute to the AGI's construction down the road.
Is that a term Yudkowsky came up with? What is with him and doing horrible things to babies?
Even so, the godlike AGI is still recognized as a real world object, through which conveniences, resources and luxury flow, not an intrinsic, personal part of experience. I say transcendent in the spiritual context.
It's the most instant-squick-flinch-inducing thing he can imagine.
EY wrote:
While religious people think of their gods as fictional objects?
Singularitarians (at least the Kurzweil-Chalmers-Yudkowsky variant) believe that when the time will come, people will upload their minds to computers, where they will enjoy enourmously increased mental abilities and sensory experiences, and possibly even merge into some kind of collective mind.
I'd say this is as 'spiritual' as it gets.