5 ms·
Let's say a genie hands you a magic wand. The genie says "you can flick this wand at anything in the universe and - for 30 seconds - you will swap places with
by breckinloggins 11mo ago
Let's say a genie hands you a magic wand.
The genie says "you can flick this wand at anything in the universe and - for 30 seconds - you will swap places with what you point it at."
"You mean that if I flick it at my partner then I will 'be' her for 30 seconds and experience exactly how she feels and what she thinks??"
"Yes", the genie responds.
"And when I go back to my own body I will remember what it felt like?"
"Absolutely."
"Awesome! I'm going to try it on my dog first. It won't hurt her, will it?"
"No, but I'd be careful if I were you", the genie replies solemnly.
"Why?"
"Because if you flick the magic wand at anything that isn't sentient, you will vanish."
"Vanish?! Where?" you reply incredulously.
"I'm not sure. Probably nowhere. Where do you vanish to when you die? You'll go wherever that is. So yeah. You probably die."
So: what - if anything - do you point the wand at?
A fly? Your best friend? A chair? Literally anyone? (If no, congratulations! You're a genuine solipsist.) Everything and anything? (Whoa... a genuine panpsychist!)
Probably your dog, though. Surely she IS a good girl and feels like one.
Whatever property you've decided that some things in the universe have and other things do not such that you "know" what you can flick your magic wand at and still live...
That's phenomenal consciousness. That's the hard problem.
Everything else? "Mere" engineering.
- stavros 11mo agoI'm flipping it at the genie first, then removing the sentience requirement in 30 seconds.
- bluefirebrand 11mo agoSeems very bold to assume the genie is sentient
- stavros 11mo agoEh, it's talking to me, it's the safest bet. It's either that or nothing.
- breckinloggins 11mo agoRight. So do you flick it at ChatGPT? It's talking to you, after all. (I honestly don't know. If there's any phenomenal consciousness there it would have to be during inference, but I doubt it.)
- stavros 11mo agoWell, if it gets to dogs, I'm not sure I wouldn't do ChatGPT first.
- breckinloggins 11mo agoHey not fair! While you're in there I have a few favors to ask...
- devin 11mo agoHow does the wand know what I'm flicking it at? What if I miss? Maybe the wand thinks I'm targeting some tiny organism that lives on the organism that I'm actually targeting. Can I target the wand with itself?
- breckinloggins 11mo ago> How does the wand know what I'm flicking it at? Magic! (i.e. not purely part of the thought experiment, unless I'm missing something interesting) > What if I miss? Panpsychism better be true :) > Can I target the wand with itself? John Malkovich? Is that you?!
- twosdai 11mo agoIt's magic. Chill out. It knows.
- srveale 11mo agoI think the illuminating part here is that only a magic wand could determine if something is sentient
- the_gipsy 11mo ago> congratulations! You're a genuine solipsist Wrong, the genie is. The thought experiment is flawed/loaded.
- breckinloggins 11mo agoInteresting critique. Care to elaborate?
- Mouvelie 11mo agoMy first start would be something like Earth itself or the Sun. Imagine the payoff if you survive !