mitigatedchaos reblogged this from esoteric-hoxhaism and added: There is a reason I said “doing Utilitarianism wrong”. One of these is that hypothetical agents don’t count unless they...
remedialaction reblogged this from mitigatedchaos and added: I mean, I reject the entire premise that somehow AI will lead to human extinction, with or without my philosophy of...
shieldfoss reblogged this from remedialaction and added: “For rejecting my head canon, the penalty is death!”
shieldfoss liked this 
toastymath said:
In contrast, it *is* (pretty much) a physical truth that people don’t have to behave rationally—so even if you have a philosophically airtight system, people don’t have to obey it or agree with it, and might reject it simply because they want to. As far as I can tell, (at least part of) argumate’s point is that even regardless of whether it’s valid or not, people *will* disagree on these things and/or not necessarily voluntarily restrict themselves to acting consistently with a given worldview. 
argumate said:
where does ownership exist? it had to be invented, it does not predate human societies 
efaun liked this argumate reblogged this from remedialaction and added: Axioms aren’t physical reality though, that’s the point, they’re chosen via a social process that requires ongoing...
bigwetnose liked this 
collapsedsquid said:
(So the private judiciary would do this) collapsedsquid said:
They way they are proposed they still generally have legal codes, it’s just they are administered privately. collapsedsquid reblogged this from argumate 
injygo liked this 
illuminatiswag liked this 
thenightetc liked this