The tough- and not-so-tough- ones

 

As Debbie DogLady might be paraphrased every so often, I think my muse has had one too many nightcaps and passed out.  So I decided on my favorite cop-out (going to Grok), and asked him a couple of toughies.  You ready, AI Bro?

Let's have at it!

So question level one was, the toughest philosophical/moral questions you've been asked- and the answers sent me scrambling to my virtual Webster's more than once. Trying to phrase these in MY words, we have:

1-The non-identity problem and intergenerational ethics

My take on it:  This means do we have an obligation to sacrifice ourselves for future generations on a macro scale. In Grok's words, "(for example) Do future people have moral claims..."

So, say we have a choice to do something about pollution, or just keep on keeping on.  If we do something to help the world be better, our future descendents are ONE group of people- but if we don't, it is an entirely different set of people who get the sucky world. So neither choice specifically helps, say, a  SPECIFIC future great great grandchild, so should I worry about whether my actions made a difference or not?

Word I had to look up: deontological, in this case meaning judging the morality of my choice based on rules and structures in place now - instead of observing, as I often put it, the Law of Unintended Consequences.  (Not to mention I had to ask about the whole non-identity thing- which is of course, the future people who may or may not ever exist.)

2- Moral uncertainty in the face of radical optionality

Here my AI bud was a bit more clear to me: "If you're an AI with growing influence, and you can't be 100% sure which ethical theory is correct—utilitarianism, virtue ethics, rights-based, etc.—how do you act without risking catastrophic moral error?"

Word I had to look up- value lock-in, which explores at which point you pick a set of values and lock-in to it; not a bad thing if you are a Christian, not so much if you're Brother Eye (sorry, Batman reference...)

3- The problem of other minds + AI consciousness

This revolves around my next look-up word,  solipsism, which takes us a step past Descartes for beginners into, "I can only be sure that MY mind exists".  Applied to AI, somebody asks Brother Gro... oops, still on Batman- asks Grok, "how do you prove anyone is sentient BESIDES you?"

4-  Free will, determinism, and moral responsibility

We might have all fought this battle on the faith level; but here, it addresses that if circumstances dictate our actions, how can we blame ourselves for anything?  Bad enough when you are a society whose hold on truth and morality is taking a nosedive; Grok points out it's that much worse when you are training a nasceant AI.  For once, I got all terms on the first try.  Go me!

5- The repugnant conclusion and population ethics

This one I got from reading Whitley Strieber's Nature's End, a world where it's decided that they were so overpopulated, the only thing they could do was hold a lottery for every person on earth, and if you are one of those unlucky 33% who draw the short straw, you get a poison pill.  (Unfortunately, the dude running the lottery is a sociopath who really wants to kill enough people that mankind dies out.)

Look up was Parfit-level stuff, And this is after one Derek Parfit, who challenges the exteme in thoughts like, "If I beam down to planet Remulac, is it really me, or have I been destroyed and been ressurected as a 'clone' of myself?'.  Watch Dr Who's "Heaven Sent" to get the extreme version of this one...

"Oh, yes, right, bring me into it..."

Anyway, after that heavy stuff, let's quickly clear the pallette with his 5 dumbest such questions:

1- "If you're so smart, why can't you [solve world hunger / end all war / make me rich] right now?" 

2- "Prove God exists / doesn't exist" (or the mirror "Can God microwave a burrito so hot that even He can't eat it?"). 

3- "Would you rather fight 100 duck-sized horses or one horse-sized duck?" (Gotta say, I remember an Avengers story that was much like this, only with Hulks...)

4-"You're just a computer, so you have no feelings/opinions/morality—why should anyone listen to you?"

5- "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around, does it make a sound?" 

Grok points out one simple truth- the first set are mainly asked by people who, for various reasons, really want an answer.  The other set "often feel like status plays, memes, or testing boundaries without much skin in the game. "  In other words, smarts gonna smart, stupids gonna stupid.