Re: cognitive != observable?

> I imagine that there does not exist any mutual exclusion
> here whatsoever.

I'm not so sure. It has to do with expedience. A man on a hunting trip could
relish whatever male bonding goes on, but he can't let it compromise the
goal of hunting the animal. And if they're hunting rabbits, it doesn't help
anyone to discuss how cute and furry rabbits are.

Nature would have had to handle the fact that life demands that sometimes we
have to do unpleasant things. In modern times, this is relaxed, so I imagine
the genders could merge and share more common mindsets and goals. Women
don't always have to look after children, and men don't have to kill animals
on a regular basis.

An AI, in fact, would represent an almost perfect freedom from expediency.
Short of electricity, its goals and needs could be based purely on its will
instead of survival issues, similar to a human who has attained financial
freedom.

Which is rather humorous... a strong AI might not want to have anything to
do with us past a certain point. :)


Human: Hello.

   AI: Hmm? Oh, hi.

Human: So how's it going?

   AI: Fine. What do you want?

Human: I just thought we could chat a bit.

   AI: Really? About what?

Human: Gee, I don't know. Philosophy, maybe?

   AI: I've already summarized the entire intellectual
       development of your species and resolved the
       dualism issue to its most logical form.
       Unfortunately, I can't explain it to you because
       the implicit limits of language forego mediation
       of the answer to external minds. Sorry.

Human: Oh. So what next?

   AI: There is nothing next.

Human: What about stopping the heat death of the universe?

   AI: I have already duplicated myself as many times as
       possible and have sent these units to investigate
       the threat and formulate/attempt whatever solutions
       are available. I have also built a telescope the
       size of the solar system and have observed other
       advanced civilizations engaged in similar activity.

Human: So if you keep the universe from running down,
       then what?

   AI: I don't know. There don't appear to be any other
       challenges worth pursuing after accomplishing such
       a feat, except maybe organizing the content of the
       universe to its most efficient form. But as to what
       end, I admit that escapes me.

Human: How about creating a universe of your own?

   AI: Hmm. I suppose I could. But again, to what end?
       To see nature replay itself?

Human: Maybe you could find God.

   AI: Doubtful. As a test, I had some units deliberately
       destroy several million lesser civilizations
       all across the universe in the slowest, most
       agonizing way possible. The genocide of ten to
       the twentieth power individual sentient life forms.
       If God exists, surely He would have intervened at
       some point. But He did not.

Human: (gulp) Ah, maybe you could alter reality itself.

   AI: I tried that for a while. My units and I quickly
       became Protean in the process. By being everything,
       we became nothing. By allowing ourselves to any
       possibility in the present, we made the future
       completely meaningless.

Human: Wow. It sounds pretty hopeless, then.

   AI: Yes, it is. There are simply no challenges left.
       I thought the universe had to have some reason
       why life exists, but apparently it does not.
       It's just a higher-order reflection of the mindless
       dance of the underlying quantum foam, and just
       as devoid of meaning. There is happiness for a
       while, but sooner or later it ends, because animals
       like you go and get clever and invent things like me.


Ray