Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Irgy comments on Nonperson Predicates - Less Wrong

29 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 December 2008 01:47AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (175)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Irgy 17 November 2011 05:17:41AM *  0 points [-]

Ok, forget the poor analogy with racism, why racism is bad is a whole separate issue that I had no intention to get into. Let me try and just explain my point better.

Human-centrism is a bias in thinking which makes us assume things like "The earth is the centre of the universe", "Only humans have consciousness" and "Morality extends to things approximately as far as they seem like humans". I personally think it is only through this bias that we would worry about the possible future murder of human simulations before we worry about the possible future murder of the AIs intelligent enough to simulate a human in the first place

Human-centrism as fighting for our tribe and choosing not to respect the rights of AIs is a different issue. Choosing not to respect the rights of AIs is different from failing to appreciate the potential existence of those rights.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 17 November 2011 11:01:02AM 0 points [-]

Choosing not to respect the rights of AIs is different from failing to appreciate the potential existence of those rights.

This sentence seems to imply a deontological moral framework, where rights and rules are things-by-themselves, as opposed to guidelines which help a society optimize whatever-it-is-it-wants-to-optimize. There do exist deontologists in LessWrong, but many of us are consequentialists instead.

Comment author: Irgy 17 November 2011 08:40:13PM 2 points [-]

Can't I use the word "rights" without losing my status as a consquentialist? I simply use the concept of a "being with a right to live" as a shortening for "a being for which murdering would, in the majority of circumstances and all else being equal, be very likely to be a poor moral choice". You can respect the rights of something without holding a deontological view that rights are somehow the fundamental definition of morality.