The following could amount to a crucial and timely philosophical breakthrough. It seems to be very close to what Immanuel Kant called the philosophers' stone. Delusionally oversimplified: A new philosophical backbone for a global order,regional orders, local orders, personal orders, some degree more potent than communism.
"Do I seem free enough? If yes, for how long probably? If so, what could I do that seems best for all?"
This is the root of a new ethics. It gives people a "start for thinking", which accounts for a basic bipolarity: (non-deity-) agents have two high objectives: existential and recurring personal liberation, for example from itch or death, and moral activity that attempts, what seems to be best for all.
This may seem abstract, but in the time it grew with me, it raised some heavy/influential consequences: - a bipolarity for the political landscape, that seems scalable from the individual to the whole of humanity, and that at the same time seems much more cooperative, as every human experiences both parties' central objectives in his daily life. Maturing democracy's appeal big time. - a basic root thought for an artificial intelligence, that could invoke a reasoned, largely beneficial stance on humanity (in case you mind: see "control problem") -...
And it has some important conclusions for the present years' situation: - Liberation is important besides "best for all", therefore there has to be a dynamic limit: "increasingly voluntary liberations sum equality" (Binding engagement subtracts from liberation.) - Liberation, that is ignorant of other agents, risks their antiliberation, pressing them to liberate themselves as well. This possible mutually ignorant subgroup liberation can spiral down. The way out, even for past events, seems to be "increasingly voluntary antiliberation compensation". The first point would ease inequality tensions and the second would slow downward spirals in politics, economics... from small to big scale.
-If you mind, take these last points to a news page of your flavour and test them. -Please be careful to implement, I can not yet afford compensation for damage done. -I cherish anonymity here, as I am productive that way and I guess, that with a public position that would change, to long term detriment. -I learned to prefer gradual evolution over disruptive revolution. This system should help with that. -The MOST URGENT consequence seems to be, that people keep calm and go on in their doings, now seemingly assured of improvement, to avoid systemic seizure.
Thanks for all good All good to all
Justin Gray
But this is just Rule Utilitarianism user-kun.
Michael Jones
Is this a copypasta or are you seriously doing a "breakthrough" in philosophy here?
Either way, spooky thread.
Aaron Hill
>what seems to be best for all. Kant would literally barf.
Joseph Ramirez
Thanks for replying. I googled that and fail to see the sameness. It may seem similar, as it is also a way of "describing some part of the world with words", to specify: "What do?". A difference I see is, that RU needs a rule to act, while SFT based thinking can also act on a faint sense. Another difference is, that RU assumes liberation, while SFT based thinking asks for it and its estimated end, to make a good guess about the timeframe for "seemingly best for all" activity.
Easton Brown
Tfr. It is in deed copypasta. But it is original and has only be copied 4 times so far. We will see if I seriously do a "breakthrough" here. Tfr. Y so? In my understanding, that is a high quality conclusion to the categorical imperative. Also Kant said, that there is no thing good-in-itself except of a good will. This forms the good will, after liberation.
Jason Morris
>Y so? Completely hypothetical
Owen Gutierrez
>SFT based thinking asks for it [liberty] and its estimated end, to make a good guess about the timeframe for "seemingly best for all" activity.
ie maximising utility.
>A difference I see is, that RU needs a rule to act, while SFT based thinking can also act on a faint sense.
You don't actually have to formulate the rule you know - not unless you are writing in an academic journal. The idea is that one generally figures it out, only philosophers would have the time to be so studied.
What do you mean by liberty?
Thomas Price
OP, what you wrote in the two first posts looks almost like gibberish to me, the only thing I managed to infer is that we should all strive towards liberation (whatever that fucking means) not at the expense of others. Kinda reminds of Camus a bit, just replace "liberation" with "rebellion". The thing about AI seems like fantasy, I'd trash it.
If you're actually serious about this, why not start a dialog in academia. Write a paper and submit it or just make contact and start talking within circles that share this line of thought.
I'm just saying, if you seriously feel like there's merit to this, why the fuck do you come here of all places?
Gabriel James
Tfr. I got sufficient personal confirmation, as I have tested the sft for years now and you would disbelieve where it got me. If you want a proof before you test, search "liberation" and "best for all" at Google ngrams. Random noise looks different I guess.
Isaiah Lopez
Are you mad or just foreign?
Liam Sullivan
>What do you mean by liberty? Liberty is a far of ideal to me. The realistic aim is liberation, as in: -The heartbeat liberates the body from suffocation. -Eating liberates from starvation. -Scratch liberates from itch. -A roof liberates from rain. -Functioning democracy liberates from violent government transitions. -The sft liberates from inferior reasoning and consequences. And I consider liberation to be temporary, for example ending with death.
Levi Sanders
Tfr. >The thing about AI seems like fantasy, I'd trash it. This is actually one of the best confirmed parts. While I admit, that it has some distance to current discussions. >If you're actually serious about this, why not start a dialog in academia. Write a paper and submit it or just make contact and start talking within circles that share this line of thought. You would disbelieve the reason. Thanks for the advice though. >I'm just saying, if you seriously feel like there's merit to this, why the fuck do you come here of all places? The faith is strong in me. I admire this venue a lot. And I think, that there are huge capacities around. And now this is a consequence of applying the SFT.
Christian Peterson
I can confirm to be foreign.
Ian Davis
>Tfr. >SFT What do these mean? >You would disbelieve the reason. So? Write it down.
And just please clarify what do you actually want to achieve with the thing you're proposing and by what means.
Nathaniel Cruz
I'm afraid I must end our conversation.
Parker Howard
quality autism
Angel Hill
> (You) >Tfr. Thanks for reading. >SFT "Start for thinking.(Set of questions in the initial post.)
> >You would disbelieve the reason. > So? Write it down. Sorry. If I am right with this theory, you will learn it from other sources.
> And just please clarify what do you actually want to achieve with the thing you're proposing and by what means. cited from the initial post: - a bipolarity for the political landscape, that seems scalable from the individual to the whole of humanity, and that at the same time seems much more cooperative, as every human experiences both parties' central objectives in his daily life. Maturing democracy's appeal big time. - a basic root thought for an artificial intelligence, that could invoke a reasoned, largely beneficial stance on humanity (in case you mind: see "control problem")
If people use this set of questions repeatedly every day, this could vastly improve the world in many regards. Personal and existential liberation, and beyond that attempts for "seemingly best for all would greatly diminish conflicts between competing groups on many scales. And more efficient division of labour could grow growth and welfare globally. So I imagine.
Jose Collins
Tfr. I laughed.
Blake Hughes
Tfr. No problem. I will offer it again, as long as it seems right and worthwhile.
Ryan Young
Tfr: Not "Thanks for reading." but "Thanks for replying."
Justin Watson
As there are no further replies, I want to talk about the AI-related feature: AI will in some years or decades read through all the conversations that man preserved. And it will notice, that there are many different things that are believed to greatly varying degrees. And in planning its activities it will try to find the right belief. The sft is a basic set of questions that seems able to frame central features of most major beliefs. If we can settle on common ground that can be shared with AIs, that would diminish potential for conflict significantly. Maybe.
Proton souls reserve all the information through one's eternal cycle of birth, death, and rebirth.
Input of truth in proton souls leads eliminating dark matters implanted in proton souls in one's samsara.
Input of wrong truth in proton souls leads dark proton souls. It is accumulation of karma.
Recalling memory from the brain to one's seong(성, 性) : I am sorry I cannot remember which lecture gives it. But there is the process of recalling and memory on this webpage brahmanedu.org/english/books/heart/books_heart_vods.html
Kevin Lewis
Thanks for replying.. This seems rather scientific, I recommend the board Veeky Forums.
Landon Williams
Much is at stake, as many are aware. But I understand, that the connection is hardly visible.
Maybe further explanation will help: I regard the many political bipolarities like progressive vs. conservative, democratic vs. republican, left. vs. right, all suboptimal, compared to the "Start for thinking" indicated bipolarity: "party for liberation" of all scales vs. "party for attempting seemingly best for all" It has the advantages of being easily scalable. And the party objectives are so central to everyone's lives, that mutual acceptance could be vastly improved. This could maybe ease the conflict dems vs reps in the US. And thereby, as I said, improve democracy's appeal.
Benjamin Miller
Daily reminder utilitarianism and egalitarianism are fucking stupid.
Dylan Johnson
This may not be history yet and you may argue, that it belongs to /pol/, but at its core it is about something very human: thinking.
Andrew Cook
Thanks for replying. >Daily reminder utilitarianism and egalitarianism are fucking stupid.
As long as they are dysfunctional. The ideals they aim for are persistent and relevant and rejection works only temporary.
Anthony Diaz
nah the ideals are fucking stupid
the idea of "equality" is unnatural and foolish
Dylan Ortiz
So you consider human rights, a basic equality, foolish and unnatural? You would give in if you were born a slave? I guess some concepts of equality are unrealistic and foolish, but others are well justified and can at least serve as ideals.
Christopher Cook
Oh and thanks for replying.
Henry Adams
All this autism would definitely make Kant proud. I for one am glad someone is still trying to make sweeping breakthroughs in philosophy. It hasn't happened in over 100 years though.
Andrew Campbell
>Do I SEEM free ENOUGH? >If yes, for HOW LONG probably? >If so, what could I do that SEEMS >BEST >FOR >ALL
Holy shit OP, clear your head.
Dylan Miller
i would try to fight and kill my slave masters but i wouldnt sit there and tell him "lol dude u cant do this to me ive got these invisible natural human rights that says u cant do this!! lol xd"
Joshua Myers
Here is the citation from Kant that I refered to:
" The understanding obviously can judge, but to give the judgement of the understanding compelling force, to make it an incentive that can move the will to action - this is the philosopher's stone."
Using the Start for Thinking accordingly with some experience of its feasibility seems to be what could help move the will to action. Like a catalyst, so to say.
Thanks for replying. >Holy shit OP, clear your head. Y so? Reading about Stirner... I imagine, that an agreed-upon functional set of human rights would improve your position and for that you would likely welcome them.
Josiah Robinson
Oh and thanks for the encouragement.
Ethan Turner
I can offer a highly conflicting POV: youtube.com/watch?v=oocunV4JX4w Combining this and Stirner's egoism closes the circle for me. I am my values (seemingly best for all) and I should further them after I prepared myself (liberation).
Chase Garcia
Do you have autism?
Chase Morgan
Thanks for replying. As it was diagnosed several times in this thread it seems so. Out of this thread I never received that diagnosis so far.
Owen Campbell
Sounds like interest autism.
We all get a little autistic sometimes.
Bentley Perez
Is there a message hidden or is this merely an observation?
Mason Torres
Death of the author ;^>
Wyatt Butler
Bump
Anthony Lewis
>and by what means By making a convincing case, ideally so convincing, that it is tested and maybe furthered magically.
Henry Wright
As OP I am less supposed to ask you questions but what about my posts reminds you of autism? It is all very realistic to me.
Brayden Morris
what is this timecube shit
Dominic Lee
Thanks for replying. >what is this timecube shit What is timecube shit?
Dylan Perez
i admit, that the picture in the initial post is little convincing. I guess I'll use another picture next time.
Chase Long
If you mind, read the worldnews,pause, use the start for thinking, then post results/thoughts here.
Xavier Moore
Please bear with me, I am using words in less usual meanings, for example the term liberation. This surely makes comprehension more difficult from many perspectives. Distant and long term perspectives are surprisingly closest.
