On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 6:18 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

>  On 2/19/2013 2:12 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:47 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>  On 2/18/2013 11:03 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 3:18 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>  On 2/18/2013 11:47 AM, Terren Suydam wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> If God is arithmetical truth, then what if anything is there to be said
>>> about its "character"? I know from a formal perspective the answer is
>>> nothing, because nothing formal can be said about truth.
>>>
>>>  This is more of an informal question, and comes out of my innate
>>> desire to anthropomorphize.
>>>
>>>
>>>  Why would you suppose that your desire to anthropomorphize is anything
>>> other than wishful thinking?  Do you also have a desire to
>>> anthropormorphize the periodic table?  the solar system?  the infinitesimal
>>> calculus?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>  Within comp, there are many minds that have infinite computations
>> resources at their disposal.  They can evolve forever, and approach
>> infinite intelligence and knowledge.
>>
>>
>>  You're just making this up.
>>
>
> I'm not.  Look in the universal dovetailer and you will find such
> intelligent processes with unlimited memory and processing at their
> disposal, in fact you will find an infinite number of them.
>
>
> Ok, show me just one.
>
>
The program is too long to fit in your inbox.  However, if you think that
the biochemistry of the brain is Turing emulable, then there are programs
which describe all the greatest geniuses who have ever lived: Leonardo,
Tesla, Democritus, Newton, Euclid, Einstein, Von Neumann, Feynman,
Ramanujan, Sidis, etc.  It follows then that there is also a program
emulating the interaction of all of them and all their productions and
discoveries over a billion years, including perhaps their own tinkering and
recursive self-improvement of their own intelligence once they develop a
theory of the brain's function and operation.  Now imagine all of this
thought and discovery occurring every millisecond.  Would that not be a
super-intelligence process?  You can always imagine a program that has X
times more super geniuses, or operating Y times faster.

The problem then becomes, to stimulate and improve these minds, you need a
complex and rich enough environment to demand that greater intelligence,
otherwise it will stagnate and become bored.  Mathematics is that infinite
font of ideas, relations, patterns, problems, etc. which is inexhaustible
and has infinitely many levels of axiomatic systems.  If super
intelligences evolve from universes like ours (only with unlimited sources
of energy / no upper limit on the communicate speed) no matter how rich
their starting universe is, it will be boring compared to the unlimited
richness of math, which is where they may inevitably turn their attentions.


>
>
>
>> The evidence is that smarter people tend to have fewer children and so
>> evolution doesn't necessary favor intelligence.  It is also quite possible
>> that evolution always leads to a stage of species growth which so exploits
>> the environment of its planet that is goes extinct within a few hundred
>> thousand years.
>>
>
> I don't see how this is an argument against my assertion that there exist
> intelligences with infinite computational resources (assuming arithmetical
> realism).
>
>
> Even assuming arithmetical realism physics and intelligence go together
> and they arise from evolution.  You seem to be postulating God(s) in
> Platonia, not ones that can act here, they are just numbers and theorems.
>


These demi-gods cannot change what happens in other branches and
subsections of the UD, but they can resume/continue/recreate occurrences
and beings from other parts of the UDA into their own part.  E.g., let's
say a demi-god was exploring one particular part of the UD and noticed some
life form was about to experience a painful death.  The demi-god might
decide to instantiate 5 incarnations of that being in that same moment and
thus provide an 80% chance that the being survives and does not experience
that painful death.  Or perhaps, right at the instant of that being's
death, provides a continuation path such that the being has a 100% chance
of continuing in that demi-god's domain of control.


>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>  They all explore the same mathematical truth and thus having the same
>> data (that of mathematical truth they explore) together with near infinite
>> intelligence, they are almost never wrong on any question or matter.  Thus,
>> despite possibly different origins, they are all of a like mind, opinion,
>> and possibly character.  The number of fundamental questions on which these
>> super intelligence disagree goes towards zero as their intelligence goes
>> towards infinity.
>>
>>  With infinite computational power, these God-like super intelligences
>> have the power to save other beings (regardless of what universe the other
>> being hails from).  These God-minds are in a position to help, and thus
>> responsible for the outcome if they fail to act.  There is much suffering
>> of conscious beings in the physical universes.  With infinite computing
>> power at their disposal, these super intelligences can determine re-create
>> any conscious being from the moment of its physical death and ressurect it
>> to a existence of that being's desires.  This is not to say this is what
>> they would do, but if it is the right decision to make, then nearly all
>> super-intelligences will agree it is the right thing to do and will do it.
>>
>>
>>  Right by whose measure?
>>
>
> Right according to the minds of the super intelligences.  It is said when
> intelligent people disagree it is due to a difference in data.
>
>
> A lot of things are said.
>
>
>  Well these intelligences have access to all the same mathematical
> truth.  If you define intelligence as the probability of being correct on
> any given question, then super intelligent entities ought to always agree,
> on questions of math, theories of mind, theology, morality, what's right
> and what's wrong, etc.
>
>
>>  If God doesn't love me and mine why should I care what he loves?
>>
>
> Maybe those God(s) do love you.
>
>
> And maybe it/they hate you.
>
>

Of the species on Earth, compassion seems to correlate with intelligence.
You read about dolphins saving injured animals from drowning, or protecting
people from sharks, and so on.  While this might be a fluke of evolutionary
history on Earth, I think that if universalism is true, compassion,
understanding, and love for others becomes an inevitable conclusion.  If
universalism is true, then super-intelligences will likely come to believe
it.  They will realize that if one person suffers, they too will experience
that suffering, and thus they may hold a morality similar to "treat others
how they wish to be treated", and "do good".


>
>
>>  When people talk about God-minds deciding what is right I reach for my
>> gun.
>>
>>
>>
> That's nice, but it doesn't really add anything to this debate.
>
>
> It points to the danger of invoking gods to do your ethical thinking for
> you.
>


Well this is the opposite.  This is me doing the thinking on the ethics,
and saying if I am right that the Demi-gods should come to the same
conclusion.




> Theists always worry that without God there will be no absolute right and
> wrong.  I worry that there will be.
>
>
That there will be what?

Jason

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to