4 ms·
An Ethical Future for Brain Organoids Takes Shape?
- dropoutcoder 7y agoHow is there an ethical future when we don’t yet understand the hard problem of consciousness? How does one know if their manufactured neural net is self aware?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- lonelappde 7y agoHow does anyone know if their naturally produced neural nets are self aware?
- shadowgovt 7y agoBy definition, one can always know their own naturally-produced neural net is self aware (cogito, ergo sum). The open question for solipsists is whether, should someone report to you their neural net is also self-aware, you should believe them.
- 0_gravitas 7y agobut how can we be sure that the cogito part is actually happening? this immediately (d)evolves into a purely ontological discussion
- shadowgovt 7y agoPersonal experience. We perceive a continuity of experiences, memory, and the difference between that and slumber or becoming insensate, and we call the experience "consciousness" and our knowledge of that "self-awareness." It is definitional; the word descends from the experience, not the other way around.
- 0_gravitas 7y agoPerhaps we need to synchronize our definitions of "experience", "perception", "personal", and "knowledge", because your very words are almost exactly what I would say in counter to your point.
- laurex 7y agoWe hold consciousness to be a marker of "something worthy of ethics" but it's a bit of a species solipsism. Consciousness is a biological process or effect. Why is it more important than other biological processes or effects? Well, because we're humans with "consciousness" and we think so. To me, consciousness is likely to be explained as an emergent phenomenon allowing humans to collaborate, rather than something that is more akin to the "soul" or "self" that is often ascribed. To my mind, ethics, if we can separate that concept from other emergent phenomena, should be applied more holistically than just to things we believe are conscious.
- xvector 7y agoKind of absurd to be concerned with regulating maybe-conscious brain organoids when our species murders 55 billion definitely-conscious land animals a year and eats them for pleasure, eh? If consciousness is the line you draw in the sand there are much bigger problems to solve. At least research on organoids would have some value to offset the suffering it might cause. I am not an advocate of letting perfect be the enemy of good, but I do not think it makes sense to invest any effort in this when it is just a drop in an ocean of suffering we create - the only drop with the potential to actually help our species move forwards.
- lonelappde 7y agoIs there any rational theory of morality beyond temporary agreements for mutual advantage? Isn't all morality a psychological weapon to trick other people into giving up their advantages, and a set of excuses that people use to justify their self-serving actions?
- eindiran 7y agoI'm not sure what you mean by "rational", but certainly there are consistent, "systematic" ethical theories that one could arrive at from first-principles. Think Kantianism, Utilitarianism, Egoism, etc. If you were to ask philosophers whether their pet theory of ethics was rational, I suspect many would answer yes. Any theory of ethics that subscribes to ethical naturalism would answer that with a definite yes. If you are going to have a contractarian position on morality and you don't want to end up thinking that morality is nothing but Machiavellianism, I suggest you read some Rousseau or Rawls (basically anyone who isn't Hobbes).
- mdorazio 7y agoSerious question: is there any peer reviewed evidence that food animals are conscious to the level of self awareness?
- trophycase 7y agoWhat's your criteria? Theory of mind? IMO if something is at the level that they can experience pain, then they are conscious enough to suffer.
- vearwhershuh 7y agoAs nietzsche said, we are beyond good and evil at this point. The ethicists are there simply to help us ignore the melancholy, long, withdrawing roar.
- PrivateRepo 7y agoRead After Virtue by Alasdair Macintyre if you want a hot take for & against this sort of thinking.
- vearwhershuh 7y agoGreat book.
- pjkundert 7y agoIt’s ok; just induce a demise, and you’re ethically in the clear.
- Rabisat 7y agoI'd say rather that your potential for ethical wrongdoing to each organoid would be capped, but it's a start.
- Rabisat 7y agoI think a catchall, bare-minimum solution, would be to limit the lifetime of each organoid. The worst-case scenario is that these organoids experience consciousness and/or suffer in some capacity. You can at least time-limit their existence so no single organoid could suffer indefinitely.
- AtomicOrbital 7y agoearth itself deserves a higher moral status than proto organs ... these humanists need to recalibrate their assumptions ... humans are an instance of a process which will continue far after humanity is superceded ... don't confuse the product for the process
- drdeca 7y agoRight, and clearly the most important moral issue of our time is that electrons might be suffering. /s