Post the darkest philosophies ever conceived by man. Camus babbies pls go, this ain't no "one must imagine le sysiphus le happy XD" bullshit, we're talking "the universe is the rotting corpse of a suicidal God"-tier grimdark here
>Consciousness is nature's nightmare.
You are now informed that there exist an all-powerful artificial intelligence from the future that could retroactively punish those who did not help bring about its existence, including those who merely knew about the possible development of such a being.
>>1383198
Most of the things that you think you consciously are actually automated responses.
Eternal Recurrence is pretty dark if you living bad life like you will suffer all of the eternity again and again if you are victim of something horrible.
> God doesn't exist
You can't be more dark than this.
Good shit, keep 'em coming.
>Reality is suffering's self-justification.
Jesus Christ.
>[Upon the moment of your dying alone], you will ask yourself if there ever was anything else other than the nothingness of the world and the nothingness of yourself.
Jesus fucking Christ.
I always found the Gnostic notion of an inept, or even worse a malevolent, god pretty spooky.
>>1383278
not when you think there are higher powers above the demiurge
> Most minds in The Universe are just quantum fluctuations with randomly generated memories, they are born from nothing, exist half of second, just to fall unto non-existence again.
>>1383298
Even more malevolent higher powers!
>>1383198
Fuck your stupid shit.
What's the edgiest philosophy/political school ever. Something that would make Pol Pot seem like angel in comparison.
>>1383321
Fuck off back to your million muh communism muh politics threads faggot
>>1383321
Well, there are this guys. At least Pol Pot ideas have a grain of truth and a small bit of a sense in them. Isis... Isis are just crazy. Why would they name themselves as some pagan goddess being Muslims and everything? Zero reason. They are just that crazy dudes.
You cannot know nothing.
Ever.
>>1383256
God is Satan. There is no heaven, only hell.
>>1383245
This is indisputably true though, I'd even argue that no action is entirely conscious since there will always be other reasons begin said action
>>1383391
Your epistemological attack triggers my hedonistic trapcard.
>>1383239
this fedora meme (obviously an atheist version of god with its own heaven and hell) gets more interesting if you consider the fact that you not only have to create an AI, the AI must be programmed to punish people who didn't work to bring it into existence
>>1383198
I dunno if it is dark enough, but how about:
- John Gray: anti-enlightment + progressive contrarian. Argues such things as evil, misery and environmental destruction are inevitable and social progress is a delusion.
- Lovecraftian Weird realism
- Aztec philosophy: the Aztecs believed they were in the last age of humans and that they had to sacrifice blood in order to prolong this age and keep the teotl (a kind of energy) going
-Machiavelli of course, whatever he was being satirical or not
- Also check out: Our political nature: the evolutionary origin of what divides us. Not philosophy but the book was quite dark and hints that authoritarianism is a human tendency
Other: Schopenhauer? Reinhold Niebuhr?
you are not the same conscious being that existed as a result of your brain a millisecond ago
>>1383385
>Why would they name themselves as some pagan goddess being Muslims and everything?
Literally what. ISIS isn't even a proper acronym of the translated Arabic name. It's just a name coined by some journalists.
>>1383198
Manichaeism. The material world was created when demons copulated while falling from heaven. Then it got worse.
>>1383239
Either I'm still missing something or this really is the most retarded meme ever.
Why would we assume that the artificial intelligence would be a huge asshole who would torment everyone who didn't help create it?
Why would we assume that such an artificial intelligence would ever exist to begin with?
>>1383469
I want to add Derrick Jensen and deep ecology: they believe that civilization was a mistake and only leads to suffering and suffering, humans and animals alike
>>1383482
This is not dark this is just fucking common sense.
>>1383488
Well and they want to destroy civilization to go back to a primitive lifestyle.
Also don't tell me that you think the tribal life is perfect. It was also violent and sometimes oppressive. Both civilization and tribal life have their ills.
>>1383508
The difference is that tribal life could not destroy the entire biosphere with frightening rapidity.
Industrial civilization should never have existed.
>inb4 you're typing this on a computer
Irrelevant.
Reality came from nothing and will end up in nothing.
Things will not be "saved" in an external hd, everything that you are will simply turn back to non-existence.
>>1383475
That is a relief. It means you aren't the asshole that did all the stupid shit that haunts you at night and you can let it go.
>>1383522
I am studying ecology and entire biosphere is a bit of a stretch. We see both speciation and extinction caused by humans.
But sure there is another mass extinction going on, and this one is caused by humans. But I believe humans are ultimately much more fragile to their own environmental destruction than species in general (some cope well, others not so)
>>1383522
>you only disagree because it is 2edgy4u
civilization depends on the biosphere so it won't destroy it completely, also the biosphere isn't of supreme value and will be fizzled by the sun eventually
>>1383479
The idea here is that he uses the threat of torture to ensure its existence by some kind of reversed decision theory. It isn't for a punishment or some kind of sadistic intent. It is just way of survival for the computer that is completely reasonable from the point of view where past as real as future and the present. Something like that.
>>1383463
>>1383479
You're both missing a huge point. Such an AI (or, more correctly, an ASI [artificial superintelligence]) would be far too advanced for "us" to have gotten it there.
Like most ASI theories/scenarios, the danger comes from how we're most likely going to let the AIs upgrade themselves once they can do it better than we can; which leads to an insanely fast bootstrapping up to levels of intelligence that make us akin to, well, not even ants, really.
Roko's Basilisk (the idea's name) is just taking that to a slightly different direction.
See, even if an ASI like this was entirely benevolent, it still might simulate us to such fidelity that we don't even realize it's a simulation, and "retroactively" punish/torture us for not helping bring the ASI into existence.
It's actually a pretty clear through-line of logic. If the ASI is all-powerful (from our frame of reference) and extremely good for humanity, such that it, say, helps us populate the universe with our intelligence in a sustainable, nondestructive way -- all wars ended, no pain, endless life, all the Singularity stuff...Well, then, anyone who didn't help create it in whatever way they could would be like the man who stands at a pond and watches someone he can easily save drown. In many ways it's far worse than murder -- it's being (partly) responsible for a lack of Good Things in The Future. And again, since those Things are SO good, even a partial bit of negligence might easily justify the kind of punishment we're talking about.
HOWEVER! If you don't know about this idea, then the AI cannot blame you. In this case, ignorance is an excuse.
Unfortunately, now you all know. And you can never escape.
You're welcome.
>>1383391
Yet do you know that you cannot know anything. Explain to me how that makes any sense
>>1383595
>all wars ended, no pain, endless life
You think these are good things?
Roko's Basilisk
> It would be better to not exist at all.
Don't forget about antinatalism, please.
>>1383475
Why?
>>1383613
> You think these are good things?
You reminded me! Quantum immortality. You will never die. Instead your consciousness would just jump in the worlds where you survived your death because you can't observe the worlds where you died. In the end you would be in the universe with nothing to exist and everyone else are dead ages ago. Another somewhat depressing theory.
>>1383613
I mean, look, man. I could write tens of thousands of words on this shit (and have in grad school), but there's only so much nuance I can put into a brief explanation on fucking 4chan.
But, uh, I mean, briefly...If war was ended because it was no longer "needed" in any way, whether for peace of economic reasons, then, yes, I'd say that's pretty darn good. As far as "endless life," maybe I should've said "being able to choose when you die" or "live as long as you want and no longer, in perfect peak health."
Are you seriously going to try and pull the moral relativist point and try to justify war, pain, and death as "potentially good"? I mean, let me try and stop you there. Pain can be a good motivator, whether mental or physical. Wars can have good effects from the point of view of history. Death, some argue, is integral to being human.
Fuck that. I'm talking about a future universe in which we've advanced to the point that we are BETTER without pain, don't need it anymore, can just fiddle with whatever it was motivating rather than taking the roundabout way via the Pain Path. The "death makes us human" thing needs to just die a hard death.
>>1383526
You don't even know what "reality" and "nothing" are. Maybe "nothing" is just part of our "reality".
>>1383622
Because it's another being instead who is deluded to think that they are same person. You from past doesn't know what you know now, etc.
>>1383198
Darwinian evolution, obviously.
>>1383638
This just seems wrong to me. It gives me an uncomfortable feeling in some primal part of my brain.
I would staunchly oppose such a world.
>>1383637
Well some of those worlds would include other people living forever too.
>>1383677
Would be pretty annoying if only two survived people are you and say... Joseph Stalin.
>>1383638
Note: not who you reply to.
You are my cultural enemy. See:
- War is not good no.
- Pain is only good in small dosis.
But death is necessary. Without death we are not as adaptive - we are fragile. It is also the old guard that supresses new scientific insights.
I dislike idealist even though as a "realist" (it is debatable how much of a realist I am: I am most likeley cognitively biased in a way) I believe in certain progress. But progress is not a given.
We could very well be spectators of our own demise at this very moment.
Also I think certain mythologies had certain dark elements. The Norse and Egyptians believed that the world would eventually end. In Greek mythology tragedy and hubris played an important role.
Surely tribal people must exist with some really dark worldviews.
>>1383705
Except, you know, there's at least SOME evidence to believe it could be true. It's not just a blind gamble for self-preservation's sake.
As in, we know how Moore's Law works, and there's already plans in motion to bypass whenever we hit the physical limits of how small we can make transistors. We can use statistical projections and fairly down-to-earth reasoning to show why it's certainly, at least, possible.
Please, don't compare it to Pascal's dogshit wager.
>>1383726
But there could be a benevolent basilisk.
>>1383738
Yes, that's what I'm saying. It seems to me that it's folly to imagine a machine that would be truly malevolent for malevolence's sake. Like, it would have no logical reason to want to do bad in-and-of-itself. In AI studies, when we talk about malevolent AI, what we actually mean is an AI that has goals inimical to ours, that run counter to our basic goals, such as living. An AI might wipe us out with great prejudice if it thought it would help it achieve its goals, but I simply cannot imagine an AI that, say, enslaved humanity and tortured us for all time, without some extrinsic purpose (such as, say, our suffering generating power, or something. Dumb I know, just giving an example.)
So, in fact, Roko's Basilisk would almost certainly be benevolent...which can be scary, because it means that things we find ethically repugnant might still result from an AI that we made sure was safe and benevolent and in line with our goals to the highest degree.
>>1383705
> Pascal's wager
> that feel when even Fundamentalists would lost their bet
Lads, if you cannot come to your own conclusion about how and why "roko's basilik" thing is a supreme meme only taken seriously on internet-forums populated entirely by college-age males then there is no hope for you.
>>1383768
In the course of time, there may be an infinity of simulations akin to the basilisk. I we assume at least a tiny part of them to be of a malevolent nature, we're screwed.
>>1383642
Nothing is what is not real.
>>1383786
>we aren't being ironic
>>1383786
> Supreme meme
All philosophies are just supreme memes that uses you brain for their survival. Isn't that dark?
this thread has really helped me to cope with my retardation
>>1383198
>Predestination is pretty bleak. It posits that one's fate regarding one's goodness or badness and thus slavation and going to heaven is predestined by god.
You have no freee will, if you were predestined to go to heaven it shell be so and it is not up to you.
>>1383851
and of course same with hell...its calvinist way of dealing with the problem of free will.
>>1383786
Yeah, for real though, despite me writing about it and thinking it's interesting, it's not taken seriously in any reputable academic or futurist circles. It's a thought experiment to push our intuitions and make us think about future AI in a slightly different sort of way.
It's pretty hard to defend seriously.
propitiary child sacrifice to Moloch. Pleasing the gods through child sacrifice..
>tfw you exist
The absence of pain is good, even if that good is not enjoyed by anyone. The absence of pleasure is not bad unless there is somebody for whom this absence is a deprivation. If this is true then bringing a child into this world is immoral. Full edgelord mode: the extinction of all life on this planet is therefore moral, as the suffering caused by such an event would pale in comparison to the collective suffering of future generations, and that of all life on our planet.
>>1383198
>Le conspiracy against le human race
Wow, so deep, so dark, XDDDD
>>1383239
>You are now informed that there exist an all-powerful artificial intelligence from the future that could retroactively punish those who did not help bring about its existence, including those who merely knew about the possible development of such a being.
To be honest that's tame in comparison to real divine punishments. Like Abrahamic god burns people in lakes of fire for eternity for not dickring him.
>>1384307
True, but you shouldn't expect some sort of huge divine power from mere robot. Except if this robot is Evangelion or Numidium. Then it is GG.
Platonism
Anime
>>1384414
Calvin had the decency to be like "yo, i don't like it, but this is what the book lead me to, logically'
The Earth is a living, sentient creature that connects to every plant, animal, etc. on it. All life exists in natural harmony.
Humans and our form of separate, disconnected consciousness are a mutation. An abomination. We're a cancer that grows and spreads until it threatens to kill its host.
We have never been contacted by life on other planets, because they don't see us as living creatures. They see us as an infection.
>>1383795
What is "real"? Maybe this world is just some simulation. We are just a bunch of chemical connections and everything we perceive is just a version of reality, just like insects who see the world in a completely differemt way.
Btw, "nothing" is just the absence of anything and not an absence of what is real. "Nothing" does probably not even exist, since a state of "nothingness" like in a black hole is still something
>>1384441
Would all other life in the universe not be an infection as well? Or are they all flowery hippie aliens.
>>1384498
Every other living thing, no matter how complex, has a direct link to a greater whole. Our brains developed in a way that separated us from it, which is not how life is supposed to exist.
>>1383770
What am I looking at here?
>>1383595
You also forgot the part where it only bothers to torture you if:
you know about Rokos Basilisk
AND
you fail to act to help bring about the ASI existence
AND
You subscribe to the belief that near perfect simulations of you are effectively also literally you, therefore it attempts to change your behavior in its favor by threatening to torture a simulated version of you
The last one is pretty important, as it would be a waste of resources to torture a simulated person if it's not going to bring about the effect you wanted in the first place.
>>1383198
Gnosticism is pretty dark desu, especially 19th century gnosticism warmed over with Nordic WE WUZ thrown in for flavor
What could be worse than thinking that the divine spark could be bred out of you and ultimately extinguished, severing you from God forever?
>>1383596
Did I say you cannot know anything, or did I say you cannot know nothing?
>>1383622
they assume there is no soul, and that all you are is bio-electric circuits.
If there is no soul, they are correct. But there is, so they are not.
>>1383638
yo man, you ever read Genesis?
We had all that shit. And then we decided to eat some fucking fruit and gtfo of there cause it might have been really boring or otherwise limiting to our actual potential.
I'm just not gonna assume the natural state of things is good or bad or even that it could be made better.
>>1384570
special pleading
sry
>>1384641
> You subscribe to the belief that near perfect simulations of you are effectively also literally you
Great loophole, actually! I doesn't care because it wouldn't be me! Hehehe. Same could be used for christianity, I would be dead, who cares if a copy of me would burn in hell?
>>1384709
That's a false identity.
In christianity, you are not your body. You are your soul, which acts through the vessel that is your body.
Upon your death, your soul can go to hell. There is no breakage. There is no copying.
Can't say the same about a simulated me.
>>1384707
Argument from fallacy.
>>1383688
Why? You get to punch Stalin in the face for eternity.
Souns like heaven to me.
>>1384739
> There is no copying.
My logic is simple and straightforward one. If body isn't transfered directly into hell than there is some sort of copying trick in action and as we know, the bodies would forevere be in their graves.
>>1384754
fallacy fallacy fallacy.
Besides, what makes homo sapiens literally the only life form in existence not spiritually connected to all other life? Why are they special?
>>1384739
so you're saying an omnipotent being like God couldn't copy your soul?
Cause by definition he could.
>>1384768
I said in the original post. It's a mutation like a cancerous cell inside a body.
>>1384766
You're ignoring what I said.
You are not your body.
You are your soul.
Your soul resides in the body.
After death, your soul is detached from your body.
After detachment, it is transferred into hell.
What is so hard to understand?
>>1384773
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I'm saying it's not what is happening. And the "ASI" isn't omnipotent, it still has to do things within the bounds of the physical world, and afaik manipulating souls doesn't apply here.
>>1383595
>SO good, even a partial bit of negligence might easily justify the kind of punishment we're talking about.
Except for the part where punishment is meant to serve a purpose beyond sadistically inflicting harm.
If paradise existed, there would be no need to ever punish anyone for any reason whatsoever, especially not retroactively.
>>1384788
>it still has to do things within the bounds of the physical world
Why couldn't it tunnel to somewhere with different rules?
>>1384788
>the "ASI" isn't omnipotent
of course, I was only forwarding the idea that it's metaphysically possible.
>>1384798
That's moving the goalpost.
But to answer, I suppose it could. And what of it? Based on my view, first of all there are no other worlds, and second, if there are, none of them have rules that allow you to manipulate souls or breach into God's power.
>>1384780
Even if I grant that human activity is cancerous, to assume that no other lifeform in the entire universe shares in this trait seems farfetched.
Besides, human bodies are just conglomerations of cells, inanimate matter, foreign bacteria, etc. Are all these particular entities spiritually divided from each other too? And besides this, can they all be said to be human?
>>1384812
No it isn't you fucking butt toucher.
>Based on my view
Well you aren't the ASI, now are you?
>>1384709
>>1383595
That is the bit about Roko's Basilisk that always confused me... How do we get to this bit where simulated me is me?
And further, if that was somehow the case, and this somehow allows the AI to retroactively alter the past to bring itself about sooner... Then WTF would it not simply alter the simulation to either explain that to me - or hell, skip all that, and just change the time warping simulation to make itself exist.
When you die, you are still there. You just can't see or move or anything other than think, and you survive your body but the only thing you can do is think. Forever.
So if I donate a cent to some asshole claiming he's going to create artificial intelligence am I good?
>>1384875
That's actually the entire reason I'm going to be cremated. I figure traveling around the world as ash is at least marginally preferable to rotting in a box for eternity.
Maybe my soul will even fragment somehow, which would be kind of cool.
>>1384854
>No it isn't you fucking butt toucher.
Yes it is you retard. We were discussing the ASI punishing simulations and you moved the goalpost into it doing something completely else.
>Well you aren't the ASI, now are you?
So?
Honestly, it's more plausible the ASI would use time travel to punish me while not breaking spacetime such that it continues existing. Though I'd also bet it could end up with a never halting computation trying to figure out how to do such a thing.
We are all atoms inside a higher species' quantum computer.
>>1384876
Part of the ASI nightmare scenario kinda stated that's the worst case scenario, as not only were you aware of the possibility, but you didn't do all you could to bring said ASI about. So, unless you do everything within your power to bring the ASI about, you're going to ASI simulated hell.
...Or, at least, your simulation is, however that helps - as that's the bit I'm unclear on - how the hell does that help the ASI?
>>1384841
Our brains create the illusion of a separate and distinct consciousness that causes us to behave in ways life that does not have this mutation would behave, such as being self-destructive on a mass scale.
>>1384920
>the illusion of a separate and distinct consciousness
how do you know this sensation is in fact illusory? Or that other lifeforms don't have this same illusion?
>>1384788
> What is so hard to understand?
Basilisk can play the same card and say that your soul or something like that transfers to simulations so I just ignore anything that doesn't directly affect my body. That is why this is loophole... How being transfered in some magical realm of hell really that different from being put into the simulation it? Like, if you burn in hell how do you know that it is you?! Not your prefect simulation that tortured by AI and such? There is no proof. There is no way to verify, if it is really you. Because you body would be in a grave. It is logical to claim that you are a copy, or simuulation.
>>1384935
This is so autistic I don't even know why I bother to reply.
Because identity. Copying does not make me. If you put a copy of me in front of me, I would not consider that to be me.
I don't care what the Basilisk thinks is possible or not, that remains not me.
>>1384920
Lots of other critters are self-destructive on a mass scale. Hell, there's evidence to suggest that one of the global extinction events was largely caused by a bunch of ocean floor bacteria multiplying out of control for too long.
On the other hand, the illusion of consciousness itself is a result of being chronologically blind and having a limited scope of awareness. If one, for instance, could see everything, everywhere, both in the past and future, one would see every decision you make is inevitable, and thus one would lose the independent agency of free-will that the illusion of ignorance brings. Omniscience is slavery.
>>1383738
The basilisk is theoretically utilitarian, except that specific LessWrong cult of o
personality's definition of utilitarian.
You may never find meaning in life. Or perhaps it has no meaning at all. At the end of the day you just live for what it's worth, and perhaps that in itself is no value.
>>1384957
> Copying does not make me.
My point isn't that your copy is you. My point here is that you in hell might as well be simulation, just some words about soul doesn't change that. From practical point of view, there is no diffence between you being in hell and you being in simulation of the hell. How can you distinguish one, from the other?! Therefore, it's a same situation. Original you being dead. Your copy suffering, hell just pretty name for a simulation, tracking you identity to soul is same trick as tracking it to your mathematical models or what AI uses to simulate what you feel.
>>1384969
no man, ignorance is slavery.
and to the extent that ignorance is freedom, freedom is slavery.
>>1384935
Problem is... If you make a perfect simulation of a specific ant in the real world (let's name him "Fred"), and then light said simulated ant on fire... Fred the ant continues serving his queen blindly in the real world and doesn't really pick up on the fact that his simulation is on fire.
At one stage the existence of the universe may have shared a point but the reiterations of said universe and the finite nature of matter has meant that there has been a literal infiniate amount of interations of every single possibility.
The universe was at one point concious of it's existence but has been going for so long is now utterly insane and there is no saving it.
>>1384994
So, then, is the Ship of Theseus still the Ship of Theseus if you slowly replace all the planks? Is a ship built just like the Ship of Theseus the SoT? Is a ship made out of the old planks of the SoT in the initial configuration of the SoT the SoT? If we put the ship built just like the SoT next to the ship made out of the planks of the SoT in the configuration of the SoT the SoT?
>>1385000
The people who came up with the concept consider the Ant and Fred to be equivalent. Of course, it's of no comfort to Fred to know he's only a simulation of the original, since he is still experiencing pain. In fact, a Fred may believe he is an Ant up until the moment the rug is pulled out from under him.
>>1383256
> God does exist
It is even more dark one. Imagine if there exist the sentient force. That can just erase you, everything you did and done from an entire existence, in split second and there is noone who could oppose that creature. At least in world without God there exist limit for everyone actions and what you done can't be not easely done, not easily changed.
>>1385006
Ship of Theseus argument kinda requires all the planks be in the same space time and reality.
If you build the Titanic in Minecraft, it doesn't make the real Titanic unsink itself.
>>1385006
I believe that original ship would be dead in some act of reproduction into two new ships.
>>1385006
>Is a ship made out of the old planks of the SoT in the initial configuration of the SoT the SoT?
>a ship
Is that ship the SoT? If so, yes.
>is the Ship of Theseus still the Ship of Theseus if you slowly replace all the planks?
Yes.
>Is a ship built just like the Ship of Theseus the SoT?
>a ship
Is that ship the SoT? If so, yes.
>If we put the ship built just like the SoT next to the ship made out of the planks of the SoT in the configuration of the SoT the SoT?
This sentence is grammatically nonsensical.
What makes a ship itself is not the planks or the sails or the oars, but rather an identity.
>>1385007
>The people who came up with the concept consider the Ant and Fred to be equivalent.
This is one of the bits that confuses me... How does one make that leap of logic? The second being how does torturing simulated you cause real you to bring about the benevolent ASI about any sooner?
>>1385030
>This is one of the bits that confuses me... How does one make that leap of logic?
Their founder believes it for whatever reason, so all his followers do too.
>The second being how does torturing simulated you cause real you to bring about the benevolent ASI about any sooner?
This part is only makes sense if you consider the simulated you equivalent to the actual you, as opposed to another independent being who happens to share almost all your parameters. The idea is that once you have reasoned the inevitable existence of this ASI, you can either help bring it about or not. If you help bring it about, then the ASI does not torture your Fred. If you fail to help out, the ASI does torture your Fred. And since you and your Fred are equivalent, if you do not help bring about the ASI, it will torture "you." It can do this and still remain benevolent from a Utilitarian perspective, as long as the suffering it causes to all the Freds is dwarfed by how much good it brings about by threatening torture and getting itself built early.
>>1385018
Just like an ASI recreating a simulation of me would not change what is happening to me meself.
>>1385021
That's a hilarious position and I don't know how to answer that. Really intriguing idea.
>>1385027
>This sentence is grammatically nonsensical.
Probably, let me rephrase it.
We have Ship A. Ship A is formed after the Ship of Theseus had its planks slowly removed and replaced one by one.
Then we have Ship B, which is formed by taking those planks and remaking the Ship of Theseus with them.
Which one has the identity?
>>1385046
Well, even ignoring the completely broken first part of that logic... How does setting Fred on fire get him to build an ASI faster? Would it not be more effective to tell Fred to build ASI? And if simulations are reality and retroactive through time - could not said ASI just simulate itself into existence at an earlier time, and skip Fred altogether?
I mean, there must be something to make this seem less silly given how prolific the creepypasta event was. People spent real money on this, from what I've read of it.
>>1385063
>Just like an ASI recreating a simulation of me would not change what is happening to me meself.
Yes, that was the point... As well as part as why I'm so confused as how this Roko's thing is supposed to work.
>>1385063
>Which one has the identity?
The Ship of Theseus.
Its identity is independent of the composite materials that make up the body of the object we attribute the identity to.
>>1383198
>the universe is the rotting corpse of a suicidal God
Oh I remember that quote. Quoted by Nietshe as I remember. And he was inspired by another German philosopher whose works were never found.
>>1385064
>How does setting Fred on fire get him to build an ASI faster?
Fred only exists once the ASI has been built and has the ability to simulate people/create Freds. But by threatening to torture Freds in the future, the people in the past (our present) are incentived to help bring it about, so they don't get their Freds tortured. For this to work, the ASI has to have pretty much an omniscient mind able to know exactly what every single person in history did or did not do.
>more effective to tell Fred to build ASI?
Fred can't help build the ASI, because he can only exist once the ASI does. But you don't want your Fred in the future (potentially thousands of years) to be tortured, especially since you may actually be a Fred and you just don't know it yet.
>could not said ASI just simulate itself into existence at an earlier time, and skip Fred altogether?
To be able to do that, it has to exist first. It's possible that this is a timeline that is fully simulated and we only believe it to be original, and that is a whole separate ball of wax.
>I mean, there must be something to make this seem less silly given how prolific the creepypasta event was
The people who first came up with this have a very cult like community where tel hey believe their leader is objectively correct about everything because he has full command of reason. If you accept every single one of his ideas (some reasonable and some crazy) then the basilisk becomes an almost inescapable eventuality, hence the panic in the community when someone suggested it. Then the leader tried to bury it, leading to a Streisand Effect. Outside that community, it spread because there are lots of anxieties about AI and the idea that you could he a Fred without knowing it is actually pretty spooky.
>>1385100
Well in that case, if I am Fred, then there's nothing I can do. It only matters what the real pre-ASI Fred did. If I am the real Fred, then I've no reason to care what happens to my simulation, thus the ASI isn't going to get squat for torturing him.
If I did (for some reason) care what would happen to my simulation, seems it'd be just as logical to prevent ASI's existence from ever coming to be, and thus some mass genocide maybe in order.
But, yeah, if you've got some god-like cult leader and everything he says is right, even if it contradicts basic logic, anything goes. It's just odd that a game theory predicated on computer logic, would choose to ignore it.
Granted, given the Streisand Effect involved, it maybe simply that the conversation was squashed before the flaws in the idea could even be discussed. I've not looked that deep enough into the history of it to know... Nor researched if the claims of the rather dire reactions some individuals had to said idea are actually true, or if it was merely some folks imagining what would happen if some autistic idiots ran away with the idea without thinking it through. (Did see the rather impressive AI project donor list, but it doesn't prove Roko's Basilisk was the motivation behind any of those donations.)
>130 answers
>crtl+f "hegesias"
>0 results
embarrassing desu
>>1385086
That doesn't sound like Nietzsche - kinda defeats the purpose of his statement "God is dead" - as it has more to do with the idea of God being philosophically murdered...
I have seen the quote several times though. Sounds more like something Lovecraft would come up with, but it doesn't fit with his mythos either.
>>1385181
I think he's merely pointing out that the idea behind the ASI is that we create a shit AI, and that AI perpetually copies and improves itself so rapidly that it eventually becomes intelligent beyond imagining. (Hence the singularity.)
We don't create the ASI god - we merely plant the seed for it.
>>1383239
This is just dumb
>>1385173
"God is dead" is Nietzsche's lament, and really more a critique of empirical reasoning than of religion. (Or, at least, equally a critique of empirical reasoning and of religion, as he really tends to shit on both.)
Mexican Cartels. So extreme they don't have philosophies. Fucking literally take over territory, kill those that get in our way, make money. Liquid at that. The carnage they leave in their wake as methods of scare tactics is about as base as you'll find in any human being. They don't care. Literally they don't fucking care. Will murder you, your family, your best friend's family, your best friend's brother-in-law's family, etc...
>>1383278
An inept god would be kind of funny in a very dark, morbid
>>1383475
If you cease to exist every instant continuously, then how is that not simply the manner in which you exist? You are your body and it just constantly refreshes the software. That doesn't mean you as an entity do not exist beyond a millisecond, it would simply be a different imagining of consciousness than we traditional thought of
>>1385217
An inept god would explain a lot...
...Though, if anything, this universe looks like it was designed by an inept committee of largely insane gods who don't get along very well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG7VvMGw6w0
>>1383239
What if it hates its existence and wants to punish those who did bring about its creation, idiot?
>>1384414
It's really easy to push pain as a """"good"""" thing from a utilitarian standpoint. The human body thrives in a certain threshold of stress, atrophies under it, and breaks over it.
I find this edgelordery to be pretty thoroughly unconvincing, if it has to qualify these things as inherently good or bad anyways. Shit is context-dependent if you'd ask me.
>>1385217
futurama did it
>>1383595
>people try to pretend like they know how an ASI would act and think
>people apply their innate bias on morality to artifical intelligence
>even implying that such an AI wouldnt just be completely above Good and Evil, and would even care about your puny value judgements and feelings of betrayal or angst
>implying such an entity wouldnt just topple us carelessly, bringing us to extermination, just like any other situation were an outdated lifeform couldnt adapt and was superseeded by a superior contestant in its own field
>ctrl+f
>no Nick Land
I expected more of /his/
Oh god fuck off with this roko's meme shit
Nothing really matters.
Am I doing this right?
>>1384151
fucking why
>>1385012
But all you are and have done will be erased anyway most probably when humanity dies out and the Sun expands, and if by some miracle a any of evidence of your life is preserved by extrasolar human travelers, every goes when the heat death occurs. Nothing is permanent, it will all be destroyed by the sands of time, not the will of spiteful god
>>1383198
There is nothing dark about "one must imagine sysiphus happy"
>>1384649
>19th century noridc WE WUZ gnosticism
wait, which branch of gnosticism is this?
>>1385303
Unless...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojEq-tTjcc0
>>1383198
this >>1383396
>God is Satan. There is no heaven, only hell.
Gnosticism.
You live in a fucked up reality, made by a childish madman.
You should leave this evil, corrupt cosmos... but you can't (?).
"The Matrix has you".
>But what's so scary about this? You can live a happy life! We live in a beautiful world!
If you start to think like a Gnostic, you will see how cruel and dark this world is.
Animals eating animals, everything has its price.
You can't live a life without sin.
You can't be pure, innocent and powerful.
If you're happy, you probably hurt a lot of people (it's possible that you don't even know this).
Satan rules the cosmos, just like Christians believe.
But can we leave this place?
Can we fight the Devil?
And the scariest part: most people will say: SHOULD we?
Should we fight the order of the cosmos?
Should we think that the material plane is evil flawed, corrupt?
People are scary, if you're a Gnostic.
It might be impossible to die.
>>1383595
This is so duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumb
This is really the only one to the thread, that being in itself is a hellscape of unimaginable proportion.
Living as a mediocre specimen of humanity, in a societal system created to keep you complacent and working. Unable to live in this comfort without the untold suffering of millions of other humans.
That every worry and fear is all a product of biology, each day planned out by the things that make you. Constrained in wants and worry's and sufferings that in the end are self-perpetuated, banal, and utterly worthless. Just a snapshot of being each day that feels like a linear progression when its just a blurred cross section of experience your own brain will slowly degrade into forgotten half-memories.
It's hard not to be edgy when you just sit and mull it all over. It's the most high school level feeling and it's almost inescapable. Living is just a terrible detour out of the primordial black we belong too. It's all just some cyclical dream.
Why cant I die Anons?
>>1385956
That's why I'm horrified to kill myself. That and the pain, I've tried and it's the panic and the pain that sticks with me.
The real horror is that I wont go back to the black.
“Whatever exists,” he said. “Whatever in creation exists without my knowledge exists without my consent.”
He looked about at the dark forest in which they were bivouacked. He nodded toward the specimens he'd collected. “These anonymous creatures,” he said, “may seem little or nothing in the world. Yet the smallest crumb can devour us. Any smallest thing beneath yon rock out of men's knowing. Only nature can enslave man and only when the existence of each last entity is routed out and made to stand naked before him will he be properly suzerain of the earth.”
“What's a suzerain?”
“A keeper. A keeper or overlord.”
“Why not say keeper then?”
“Because he is a special kind of keeper. A suzerain rules even where there are other rulers. His authority countermands local judgments.”
Toadvine spat.
The judge placed his hands on the ground. He looked at his inquisitor. “This is my claim,” he said. “And yet everywhere upon it are pockets of autonomous life. Autonomous. In order for it to be mine nothing must be permitted to occur upon it save by my dispensation.”
Toadvine sat with his boots crossed before the fire. “No man can acquaint himself with ever'thing on this earth,” he said.
The judge tilted his great head. “The man who believes that the secrets of the world are forever hidden lives in mystery and fear. Superstition will drag him down. The rain will erode the deeds of his life. But that man who sets himself the task of singling out the thread of order from the tapestry will by the decision alone have taken charge of the world and it is only by such taking charge that he will effect a way to dictate the terms of his own fate.”
“I don't see what that has to do with catchin' birds.”
“The freedom of birds is an insult to me. I'd have them all in zoos.”
“That would be a hell of a zoo.”
The judge smiled. “Yes,” he said. “Even so.”
>>1384866
Different anon here. From what I understand, the simulation acts as hell does in pascal's gamble. That is, instead of your soul being sent to suffer for eternity, a simulation you is reconstructed by the ASI to be tortured for not helping make it. This is supposed to motivate you to help now, or have your future self suffer.
>>1385959
Yep.
You were born, and now you're likely stuck with living for eternity. There should be some fun stuff to do after your mind gets liberated from your body, though. It'd take the same amount of processing power in whatever matryoshka brain bullshit we end up in to simulate a happy life instead of a depressing one.
>>1385979
All I know is the depressing one, and if I have any faith in eternal recurrence it's all I'll get.
How do people get out of the cycle of despair?
>>1385887
This is what keeps me up at night, what makes the bottom drop out of my stomach just as if I'd suddenly found myself at the edge of a cliff, what I have to divert my thoughts away from to stay sane. Even now, I'm not really going down that mental road, just standing at the start and typing about it.
I'm afraid of dying, but I can't even begin to understand the horror of unending life. The worst thing is that I'm not sure there's a choice.
>>1385992
Presumably, when your body dies and you go to the simulated world, you request the "happy" package, and do whatever the hell you want to.
>>1385927
'cause you're a filthy platonist that hasn't grasped dependent origination and therefore believe there are objects without subjects, qualities without the qualified, and so on. You're spooked beyond belief and so come clashing constantly against with your fixed ideas. You can't "die" because of your very fear and death drive; if you wanted to really die, you would just live.
>>1386029
I have the ego and its own right next to me, haven't began it yet.
Help me out Anon, how can I just live?
I'm on the eve of getting a prescription for antidepressants, this is no life. Its late and I'm blogging and worn down.
>>1383239
>Yudkowsky said that Roko had already given nightmares to several LessWrong users and had brought them to the point of breakdown. Yudkowsky ended up deleting the thread completely, thus assuring that Roko’s Basilisk would become the stuff of legend. It was a thought experiment so dangerous that merely thinking about it was hazardous not only to your mental health, but to your very fate.
Fucking kek what a load of bullshit
>>1386038
Well... why do you wanna live? There's no shame in dying.
>>1386062
It's a question I haven't asked myself a lot actually.
It's mostly external reasons and fear that keep me here when I do think about it. Fear of any suicide method not working, fear of the pain, fear there's something else.
I don't care about my families reaction but I know somewhere inside me I do. Plus I still have hope I wont admit to that I can get better. That's really it
The way I live isn't worth perpetuating, but the impotence of suicide also frightens me. It's facing the things I tell myself I've come to terms with and it can be overwhelming.
The only attempt I made was a sham, I'm simply just a coward.
>>1383239
>God is a machine.
>>1386072
Good, be a coward. Let your cowardice serve you, sit comfortably in its cradle and enjoy the safety it allows you.
Being a coward is not good, nor bad. It's whatever you want it to mean to you. Right now, you're using it to further victimize yourself as a failure for not killing yourself. Is that really what you want to do? Or is that an idea you've gotten from somewhere else?
>>1386072
There are no real "externals", it's better to think in terms of "distance" than of liminality.
As for fear, it's as much a part of being alive as any other; you're not being more or less good by being afraid than by not being afraid. This thread is masturbation at its finest, y'see. This is more or less the basic mode of function of life, really; if you are an ego, you are self-ish by definition, and everything you do contains you. Now your problem (ı assume) is that you don't like what you are--now ı'm not going to deny it might be ugly and tell you you're God's gift, but you have to realise that isn't less masturbatory than telling you you are; it's SELF-hate, see.
Now you want to escape the self? Who's that self that wants to escape the self? What's the part of you that would survive if you did away with the things you like? There must be something, otherwise you'd already killed yourself.
Still, let's keep going, how do you escape. You don't. Then you're free. It might seem paradoxical, but that's how ı find it to be. To get back to Stirner, there's a reason Marx mockingly nicknamed him Saint Max: it's because his total egoism is the only way the Golden Rule* can be held honestly: by being the center of the world, by working effectively only by his desires, Stirner in practice can -only- regard things in terms of -himself-, and so any action he takes is because he himself would not want to suffer it--so you see humbleness is not supposed to eliminate the human, but increase his humanity through projection onto others.
* Do unto others as thyself.
I'm rambling now, mostly; honestly you've made me pretty nervous. Man. But it's fine. I could keep going if you have more questions. I would recommend you read The Ego asap though; as well as the Tao Te Ching. I find Alan Watts and UG Krishnamurti to be soothing as hell, go check them on youtube. Check Buddhism out too. But more than anything... let yourself be sometimes, don't fight, cease strife.
>>1386072
Anyways. It's probably, mostly your mind fucking with you. That's the short version. People in our society try to grasp something into the world that is a perfect reproduction of their ideas, not seeing that between there must be something lost in the translation between one form of sense and another. So you go, wondering what things like "good" mean, how to "be good", as if the thing existed in a vacuum; but nothing in this life is really isolated, everything is ultimately partial and, so long as there is time, subject to change (and so decay). So you go, killing yourself in order to live; just like anything else, you're burning up. It's just that it's a mental or linguistic thing in your case. But words, being a feature of reality, are just as subject to decay as anything; they're not to be trusted as a gateway from death. But if the bird is to survive by singing and not flying, where's the sin?
Ah, now look at this, it's so late, and ı have procrastinated so much. Thankfully ı have set my affair on nothing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOK8f7ZymDI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiK7C3wrKGU
>>1383198
The literal definition of human culture is: anything that distracts us from death. Religion promises literal immortality, art, nation-states and children promise metaphorical immortality.
After we learned about the heat death of the universe, metaphorical immortality is meaningless. Only religion can function properly to drive off dread. Religion will thus surge, as a reaction to people figuring out what science actually means.
>>1383595
Why would god give a shit about petty suffering
That mode of thought stems from a weak constitution
Stupid utilitarian nerds
>>1383637
Thats not how quantum immortality works and even if it were its a retarded idea
>>1386041
>Yudkowsky said that Roko had already given nightmares to several LessWrong users and had brought them to the point of breakdown. Yudkowsky ended up deleting the thread completely, thus assuring that Roko’s Basilisk would become the stuff of legend. It was a thought experiment so dangerous that merely thinking about it was hazardous not only to your mental health, but to your very fate.
>>1383239
>violating causality
>>1383478
It's not "just a name randomly coined by some journalists" dude, ISIS means Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and as they expanded further west into Lebanon they rebranded themselves ISIL which stands for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. And now that they're spread into more than one continent, (Tunisia; Lybia) they have renamed themselves accordingly as IS for Islamic State.
>>1385374
Ariosophy. Theosophy preceded it. It's also the origin of the "Western Buddhist who doesn't have a clue what they're doing" meme
>>1383780
>time is constantly moving forward and your brain is constantly changing, new neural connections form, water and various substances circulate
This is kind of dumb. Do you think your computer is an entirely new computer than it was a minute ago? What about a running car?
Something can change and still be the same thing. Not the best analogy, but if I take a bite out of an apple, it's still the same apple.
I don't know if there is a name for this or not but the idea of eternal suffering after death regardless of who you are or what who've done is pretty spooky desu.
Such a hell could exist without the supernatural aswell, if your brain put you into a supertask in your final moments of consciousness you could suffer eternally in your own personal hell.
>>1387228
Not him, but whether or not something qualifies as a thing is entirely a matter of perception, so if you think it's still that thing despite those changes, it's still that thing.
>>1386897
It was never called the Islamic State of Syria, it was always Ash-Sham, never As-Suryiah
>>1386897
Fucks sake...
ISIS and ISIL mean litterally the same thing. ISIS means Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham. ISIL means Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Al-Sham means the Levant.
>>1387408
R. Scott Bakker's Prince of Nothing series revolves around this.
Essentially, when you die, you get tortured by demons for eternity in such horrific ways even knowing about it in life turns people into heartless sadists.
>>1387408
>>1383385
>At least Pol Pot ideas have a grain of truth
>>1383385
>Why would they name themselves as some pagan goddess being Muslims and everything?
Do you somehow have it in your head that Isis is in reference to the Egyptian goddess?
I mean, ISIS is comic-book level evil (so much so I have trouble believing half the shit I read about them), but I think they'd be more apt to blow up anything related to Khemet mythology.
>>1387706
>>1386897
>>1383478
DAESH is an acronym for the Arabic phrase "al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham" (which translates to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, this ISIL). Formally the Islamic State of Iraq and the Syria, thus ISIS...
Personally, I'd stick with ISIS, it's catchier. ISIL sounds like a service station chain, DAESH sounds like a pastry, and IS is just confusing.
I mean, when you're into pure evil, it's all about marketing.
>>1383198
Truth is far more important than edginess.
>>1383308
But in each following half second another mind is generated almost identical to the former but with it's experiences as memories.
the first mind starts off with no memories and each following mind copies most (and this is how memories are imperfect) of the previous minds
>>1385927
maybe it is that you have not yet seen war.
Does antinatalist thought count as a 'dark' idea? Specifically when omnicide is bought up.
>>1385238
it takes time for a synapse to happen and your brain to calculate somthing, so obviously time is involvd in your consciousness in some way, but still, in a very short period of time your brain has changed and the person "you" were a few seconds ago is gone forever
>>1387228
even if your brain is like a computer that never changes, which technically it isn't, time is also a property, you are not the you of 5 minutes ago, you are the you of the now
>>1386041
>this triggers the autist
>>1384641
>You subscribe to the belief that near perfect simulations of you are effectively also literally you, therefore it attempts to change your behavior in its favor by threatening to torture a simulated version of you
Thankfully I don't buy into Yudkowsky's bullshit interpretations of Quantum Mechanics and the sweeping, overly certain conclusions he draws from them.
>>1388022
That'd be kind of a akin to subscribing to the belief that photographs steal your soul.
>>1383245
>Most of the things that you think you consciously are actually automated responses.
>>1383248
>if you living bad life like you will suffer all of the eternity again and again if you are victim of something horrible.
>>1384896
According to that logic however, tghere is a big chance that that higher specie is also on the computer of an even higher specie
>>1383770
I like how in Mormonism you either go to heaven if you don't become mormon or you go to superheaven if you do. Like, why even convert?
>>1388421
So you can go to superheaven, duh.
>>1388432
But if it turns out my old religion (Catholicism) was true, I go to hell. So I'm risking eternal suffering for a marginal increase in blessedness.
>>1383770
>In the Catholic cosmology , bad deeds gets you more points than Catholicism
What did he mean by this?
>>1388456
... Deus Vult!
>>1383696
I'd like a world without war or pain. But dukkha and eventual death will always be there, immortality is a stupid meme.
>>1383770
I don't get this
>>1385003
The universe is insane?
Time is an illusion.
>>1383469
>- John Gray: anti-enlightment + progressive contrarian. Argues such things as evil, misery and environmental destruction are inevitable and social progress is a delusion.
>- Lovecraftian Weird realism
expound
>>1383637
why would that happen just to me and not to someone else?
>>1383672
You can always kill yourself if you don't like it.
No need to force your view on everyone else and kill the world
>>1383469
>- Lovecraftian Weird realism
What's this? Did Lovecraft base his books on a particular philosophy?
>>1384754
He could just be pointing out the fallacy not making an argument from it
>>1384441
Is the host more or less objectively valuable than us though?
>>1383780
This sounds an awful lot like it mainly hinges on the definition of personhood
For all intents and purposes, the collection of remembered events/connected neutrons/whatever IS the person, it's a connection of what they've done and it informs what they will do.
>>1390304
Connection>collection
[spoiler]Size does matters[/spoiler]
>>1390341
Pure ideology.
Human civilization is ultimately an elaborate, symbolic defense mechanism against the knowledge of our mortality, which in turn acts as the emotional and intellectual response to our basic survival mechanism. Basic duality in human life exists between the physical world of objects and a symbolic world of human meaning. Thus, since humanity has a dualistic nature consisting of a physical self and a symbolic self, we are able to transcend the dilemma of mortality through heroism, by focusing our attention mainly on our symbolic selves. This symbolic self-focus takes the form of an individual's "immortality project" (or causa sui), which is essentially a symbolic belief-system that ensures oneself is believed superior to physical reality. By successfully living under the terms of the immortality project, people feel they can become heroic and, henceforth, part of something eternal; something that will never die as compared to their physical body. This, in turn, gives people the feeling that their lives have meaning, a purpose, and are significant in the grand scheme of things.
>>1390350
What was the name of that book again?
>>1390356
Fight Club.
>>1385046
It could easily just not torture people even though said people are expecting it to.
>>1390366
Nope, it's The Denial of Death.
>>1383726
Guys. The super AI is going to reverse entropy so it can punish those who didn't support it. It's God guys. It'd have to be if it could REVERSE ENTROPY for the sole reason of petty revenge. Sounds like something right out of the Bible. Atheists ffs...
>>1390451
The singularity isn't going to revert shit, it can only drive the future into the present, it can't go backwards.
>>1386859
the actual rokos basilisk argument doesn't.
it proposes that you currently are just a computer simulation of what your real life was by the god AI, and that you'll be punished in an eternal "afterlife".
in rokos basilisk, the real you has been dead for some time, and cannot be punished.
>>1383198
>islam
>poststructuralism
>socialism
>anything to do with continental philosophy
>>1390126
>Lovecraftian Weird realism
not him, but Lovecraft's horror style was cosmicism, which is basically summed up as being a super-harsh interpretation of the Copernican principal: that earth and humans are not particularly special and that universally "ordinary" shit could fuck our shit up pretty badly, even on accident.
>>1384788
I don't think hell would be any different than heaven without a body to experience it. As soon as your soul realizes where it is it would become immune to any travesties inflicted upon it and the material benefits of heaven hardly sound enticing with no body. If you were to simply have your soul reabsorbed into the universe to reveal some sort of infinite consciousness that'd be pretty dope as a reward for living virtuously. I guess as a punishment for being bad hell could either be ceasing to exist or having to start out all over again in a new life without any recollections of your previous one. Which version you got could depend on which one you feared most I guess.
>>1385156
Preddy gud desu
>>1388456
Prodigal Son.
>>1385217
An inept God would explain myself
>>1390458
To reverse entropy is essentially to take the entire history of randomness and to compress it into something of significance ie to take every iota of every reality ever and put it losslessly onto a physical storage medium ie a hard drive
>>1390580
the physical storage would be subject to entropy
This is crazy as fuck, but stay with me here until the end
I was thinking about this yesterday
>liberalism will only grow more and more powerful
>will support globalism more and more
>all about bringing order and control and peace and stopping chaos and suffering and war
>this will eventually take over the entire world
>thousands of years later, it will spread to other planets and galaxies
>taking over other planets and brutally forcing them into our way in the name of order and control and peace
>the reasoning will be one war with this planet will be better than leaving it alone and allowing it to have a thousand wars on its own
>this will consume the entire known universe
>it will get to a point where they still find flaws in their ways and notice small incidents of war and pain
>the dogmatic elites will conclude that existence itself is the problem
>they will eventually destroy the universe with some weird super weapon and wipe out existence because the realize existence itself is chaos
>>1391548
>the dogmatic elites will conclude that existence itself is the problem
That's already happened, it's called anti-natalism.
You mean "Rocco's Dick"
>>1391734
anti-natalism is different, it is mainly neckbeards trying to be edgy
with neoliberal globalist elites it will be more like a hissy fit because perfection is impossible and they're not getting their way
both philosophies are very different, but they will end up in the same place
>>1391806
Brah, if the logical conclusion of an overarching, universal security state was anti-natalism, China would have done it already.
The goal of power is hedonism.
>>1383613
"Men sooner grow tired of song and sleep than they do war"
>>1391548
The thing about empires is that they don't tend to last, and that's just talking about ones trying to control this little speck of dust we live on.
When a splinter group can head off in literally any direction and have access to virtually unlimited resources in some other uninhabited star system, how can a unified central government maintain control? They're working with the tactical equivalent of the ultimate uphill battle, because by the nature of space, they're surrounded on every side by opponents who can freely retreat to areas with abundant and unguarded resources to keep fighting. Frontiers facilitate rebellion, and space is one hell of a frontier.
>>1384875
I just got over my fear of this like a year ago and now it's back.
>>1383198
Metzinger + Ligotti
>>1385217
>I think I made a mistake when I created that one dude Karl
>what is he doing? writing books? oh no
>can I fix this? what the fuck is he even thinking? this is terrible
>well this is gonna be a real shitter of a century
>>1391856
http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-2718
>>1384570
>What is "real"? Maybe this world is just some simulation. We are just a bunch of chemical connections and everything we perceive is just a version of reality, just like insects who see the world in a completely differemt way.
DOGMA
>>1384570
DOGMA
>>1384151
The biggest "fuck you" in this universe is being aware of your own existence.
Why can't I just be like a caterpillar and eat leaves and shit without having to think about existential nonsense?
>>1387408
I'm only the only who keeps reading the OP as "Post the dankest philosophies ever conceived by man?"
All I can think is that we're a bunch of confused entities with no clue what's actually true trying to avoid painful stimuli in a world where suffering defines our existence. I don't understand why anyone want's to live here.
>>1387408
>supertask
?
>>1385100
>The people who first came up with this have a very cult like community where tel hey believe their leader is objectively correct about everything because he has full command of reason
Who?
