= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Open Thread, November 1 - 7, 2013 - 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 (299)
I don't find this argument convincing.
Yes, and..?
Let me quote William Gibson here:
Addictions ... started out like magical pets, pocket monsters. They did extraordinary tricks, showed you things you hadn't seen, were fun. But came, through some gradual dire alchemy, to make decisions for you. Eventually, they were making your most crucial life-decisions. And they were ... less intelligent than goldfish.
There a good chance that you will also hold that belief when you will interact with the Tulpa on a daily basis. As such it makes sense to think about the implications of the whole affair before creating one.
I still don't see what you are getting at. If I treat a tulpa as a shard of my own mind, of course its desires matter, it's the desires of my own mind.
Think of having an internal dialogue with yourself. I think of tulpas as a boosted/uplifted version of a party in that internal dialogue.