Nodal point of thought 2021-05-31

There is always an “unfounded assumption of correctness” in any logical assertion.

• Related Munchausen’s trilemma.

Let’s break down some of the arguments to try.

• Humans are not rational, so we should delegate certain rights to computers.”
  • Humans are not rational.”
  • Computers are more rational.”
  • The more rational should have the right.”
    • This is suspicious.
    • Do computers need rights?

I used to play around with seemingly contradictory terms like Computer Rights for fun, but when it comes time to discuss the question, “Do computers need rights? I find myself not thinking so much about it when it comes to the discussion of “Do computers need rights?

• Delegate decision-making” fits better than “delegate rights.”
  • Humans are not very rational, so we should leave decision-making to more rational computers.”

Example: Voting rights

• Homo sapiens recoil at the idea of giving computers the right to vote.
• No need to give computers the right to vote.
• Homo sapiens can delegate voting decisions to computers.
• It would be the same situation as if the computer had as many votes as the number of “homo sapiens who want the computer to decide who to vote for instead of deciding for themselves.”

Computers should not directly harm homo sapiens, but rather guide their thinking in a convenient way

• public opinion poll

• the War on Intelligence

• Actual warfare in modern times

• sabotage manual

• Strictly apply all rules and regulations in every corner.

• We must break the law.

• Get rid of the persona.

• Sanyuttha Nikaya 6.1.1

---

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/思考の結節点2021-05-31 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.