4 ms·
> We're just their pets I am not sure it is ever established that we are anything. I think in the Culture novels the term "human" is used as a shorthand for "h
by otikik 3y ago
> We're just their pets
I am not sure it is ever established that we are anything. I think in the Culture novels the term "human" is used as a shorthand for "humanoid citizen of the Culture", not necessarily Homo Sapiens (or their descendants).
I understand where that "pet" metaphor is coming from, but I also think it is very limited. It is looking at a relationship from the point of view of power level and intellect, and nothing else. The relationship depicted in the books has many more dimensions that are left out, and that I consider critical. I would highlight 3 items.
The first one is that even if Minds are (probably) as intelligent compared to us as we are compared to housecats, the fact that the "base intelligence" that we are using is that of a human already provides a richness to the relationship that the "cat" can not simply provide. A human could (for example) attempt to hide information from the Mind in order to further their own interests, months from now. Probably foolish, but a kind of foolishness which is outside of what a cat's planning capabilities.
The second one is on the opposite side: the relationship that a regular human can have with a housecat is limited also by the "highest-level mind". A Mind would be able to have way richer and more varied relationships than a regular human, including with other humans, merely because it has more options at its disposal. A Mind could (for example), track thousands of external body signs in order to deduce that a human is hiding something, and still have plenty of other options at their disposal (down to actual mind-reading; although that would be probably distasteful).
Finally, I think Minds need humans. This is not explicitly mentioned in the novels, but all the minds that had no humans with them (that I remember, at least) where the "unstable", eccentric or downright crazy.
I think a better relationship analog with something that exist today instead of a "owner vs pet" is a "parent vs child". The power balance is still there, the difference of raw mind power is also still there, but the parent is strongly motivated to make the best possible world for their child, and they need each other. It's just that in this case, humanity is the parent, and the Minds are the descendants. But well, I said "better", not perfect.
- KirillPanov 3y ago> Finally, I think Minds need humans... all the minds that had no humans with them (that I remember, at least) where the "unstable", eccentric or downright crazy. Well okay; the humans aren't pets, they're emotional support animals. Not a huge improvement though.
- otikik 3y agoYou might have missed my last paragraph. I think family is a better metaphor. Families do provide emotional support as well.
- KirillPanov 3y agoNo, I think it's a terrible metaphor. The Minds have no reason to treat humans well. Humans have a powerful evolutionary motivation to treat their kin well.
- pixl97 3y agoWhy does this idea bother humans us so much? It troubles us so much that something could be much smarter than us. That something is stronger than us is barely a consideration these days after we've automated nearly everything, yet we've still not transcended the idea that minds far greater than ours can and will be created.
- KirillPanov 3y ago> Why does this idea bother humans us so much? I dunno; it doesn't bother me at all. What bothers me is pretending that the Culture is humanity's. Or that humans are in any way relevant to the whole plotline. It's like if somebody rewrote all the great works of literature from the perspectives of the protagonists' dogs, and then threw away the originals, and pretended that this was somehow a useful perspective. That would bother me.
- sdwr 3y ago> limited also by the "highest-level mind" Well said. Consciousness is given as much as taken, emerges from dialog and space granted. You can uplift a dumb pet just as easily as you can stifle a smart person.
- rsynnott 3y ago> Finally, I think Minds need humans. This is not explicitly mentioned in the novels, but all the minds that had no humans with them (that I remember, at least) where the "unstable", eccentric or downright crazy. Yeah, this is mentioned explicitly a few times. It's also never quite stated, but it's certainly implied that humans are capable of greater ruthlessness/moral ambiguity than the machines, which is handy for SC.