3 ms·
One of the common bad takes is that since personal things can be distilled to “just math” they are no longer personal or valuable in the sort of way we value p
by trescenzi 2y ago
One of the common bad takes is that since personal things can be distilled to “just math” they are no longer personal or valuable in the sort of way we value personal things. Increasing our understanding of how the world works shouldn’t devalue the world.
To put it another way, people having souls is not the only reason to treat people like people. Or as Dr Seuss says: A person’s a person no matter how small.
- bee_rider 2y agoBut I do think there are some psychological hurdles we’ll have to overcome, as it becomes possible to mechanically copy individual personal aspects. A person’s a person no matter how small, but we aren’t all used to thinking of ourselves as very small.
- visarga 2y ago> they are no longer personal or valuable in the sort of way we value personal things There were people with your face or voice before, you just didn't care. AI continues a trend: the internet has always been post-scarcity, free copying and offering an amazing array of choices. We are acting as if it's a new thing, but it's been here for 25 years.
- trescenzi 2y agoWe shouldn't value people simply because they are scarce. People are valuable intrinsically. Identical Twins don’t have less value because there are two of them. A mother is not less sad when one of them dies as compared to a mother who doesn’t have twins. Trying to make such a comparison of value is gross. I do appreciate that not everyone agrees with that view, and that capitalism tries to value people at their output but intuitively plenty of people find that sort of thing wrong and ignoring that intuition is something I’d argue will not end well for us as a society.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]