Nothing is good or bad, but the encephalization of phenomenal valence via afferent neural connections from our limbic system’s hedonic hot spots makes it so.

For the final project of CS181, Ethics in computing at Stanford, my team and I built this website about the ethics of BCIs in the workplace.

http://stanford.edu/~mcsforza/breaking-the-thought-barrier

It turns out that there are policy vacuums on this issue. Namely, we do not know how to deal with the data collected by BCIs that enhance productivity in the workplace. After all, they could reveal things such as drug use and mental health status. We analyzed these ethical concerns from a transhumanist point of view – and argued, too, that a transhumanist framework is necessary and appropriate to analyze emerging technologies such as this one.

David Pearce joined me at Stanford to discuss the future of consciousness in the “Age of Reason” panel on that very topic.

“Let’s distinguish the worst that can happen if transhumanists succeed in our objectives from the worst that can happen if we fail. A world without the biology of involuntary aging or involuntary suffering may still be sub-optimal by some criteria. But compared to the horrors of Darwinian life, even a substandard utopia can sound like Heaven.”

– David Pearce

Check this out.

Several interesting points.

1) The Judeo-Christian God of the Old Testament fits the description of Brahman, the highest entity in charge of governing our sphere of reality. But in contrast to theistic traditions, this being is not described as a “creator God.” Instead, this entity seems to be just another entity in the infinite sea of reality. He just happens to hold the power here, right now, over us, for simple causal reasons (due to its past good karma). Eventually he will die. Worse, this entity is profoundly deluded. He thinks that he is God, the supreme creator of everything. Sir Charles Eliot explains:

“There comes a time when this world system passes away and then certain beings are reborn in the “World of Radiance” and remain there a long time. Sooner or later, the world system begins to evolve again and the palace of Brahma appears, but it is empty. Then some being whose time is up falls from the “World of Radiance” and comes to life in the palace and remains there alone. At last he wishes for company, and it so happens that other beings whose time is up fall from the “World of Radiance” and join him. And the first being thinks that he is Great Brahma, the Creator, because when he felt lonely and wished for companions other beings appeared. And the other beings accept this view. And at last one of Brahma’s retinue falls from that state and is born in the human world and, if he can remember his previous birth, he reflects that he is transitory but that Brahma still remains and from this he draws the erroneous conclusion that Brahma is eternal.”

2) Even though Buddhist schools have disagreements on whether “Primordial Buddhas” exist, their nature, and their status as ‘the ground of all being’, one thing seems to be agreed upon: The universe has no beginning; thus no entity can be described as the primordial creator of the universe. As an example of the kind of arguments given for the impossibility of such being, here is a 7th century dialogue by the Chinese Buddhist monk Xuanzang, as he critiques the Indian doctrine of the great Eternal Self:

“According to one doctrine, there is a great, self-existent deity whose substance is real and who is all-pervading, eternal, and the producer of all phenomena. This doctrine is unreasonable. If something produces something, it is not eternal, the non-eternal is not all-pervading, and what is not all-pervading is not real. If the deity’s substance is all-pervading and eternal, it must contain all powers and be able to produce all phenomena everywhere, at all times, and simultaneously. If he produces phenomena when a desire arises, or according to conditions, this contradicts the doctrine of a single cause. Or else, desires and conditions would arise spontaneously since the cause is eternal. Other doctrines claim that there is a great Brahma, a Time, a Space, a Starting Point, a Nature, an Ether, a Self, etc., that is eternal and really exists, is endowed with all powers, and is able to produce all phenomena. We refute all these in the same way we did the concept of the Great Lord.”

In brief, the very act of creating something is itself a mark of impermanence. That’s an interesting take on theology I’d never heard before. This, however, does not preclude an eternal God that exists in Plato’s world of forms, does it? It just means such God is causally ineffective. Perhaps the power of God come from logical implication rather than causation. I.e. God matters, not because He can do anything to us, but because his existence implies certain facts that are causally relevant for our life. Or not.

3) I find the idea of Bodhisattvas and Primordial Buddhas to resonate a lot with my core ethical views. Unlike the Gods of other traditions, these Gods are genuine negative utilitarians who would rather “cancel existence” than allow a mouse to suffer a heat stroke (to give a random example).

Who knew Great Negative Utilitarian entities were so highly revered in this worlds? It is almost unbelievable once you consider the fascination with Hell and damnation that many people have in this society.

If Rudolph Steiner’s account of the life of the soul after death is correct, then there would be a good reason to avoid hedonic recalibration above the proverbial ‘hedonic zero.’

He claims that between rebirths, a period that will last for at least a few months, the soul experiences a tremendous sense of loss and craving for the body it once had. Worse, whatever things the person used to enjoy, look forward to, or be addicted to in life, will be things the soul will now intensely crave.

89% of all superstitions, such as the belief that “crossing a black cat brings bad luck,” are completely false.

The other 11% were programmed into the fabric of reality by Isaac Newton’s ghost to mess up with scientists.

No action required. Just appreciation. Of this course description. I find it poetic and sublime, like a conceptual flower in the current zeitgeist:

“ASNAMST 144: Transforming Self and Systems: Crossing Borders of Race, Nation, Gender, Sexuality, and Class (CSRE 144, FEMGEN 144X)

“Exploration of crossing borders within ourselves, and between us and them, based on a belief that understanding the self leads to understanding others. How personal identity struggles have meaning beyond the individual, how self healing can lead to community healing, how the personal is political, and how artistic self expression based in self understanding can address social issues. The tensions of victimization and agency, contemplation and action, humanities and science, embracing knowledge that comes from the heart as well as the mind. Studies are founded in synergistic consciousness as movement toward meaning, balance, connectedness, and wholeness. Engaging these questions through group process, journaling, reading, drama, creative writing, and storytelling. Study is academic and self-reflective, with an emphasis on developing and presenting creative works in various media that express identity development across borders.

“Terms: Aut | Units: 5 | UG Reqs: WAY-CE, WAY-ED | Grading: Letter or Credit/No Credit

“Instructors: Murphy-Shigematsu, S. (PI)
Schedule for ASNAMST 144”

Humans live near true hells but only wander to their edges. We may feel awful and sick sometimes but we rarely experience the sustained suffering that many other animals do.

I’ve come to the tentative conclusion that if we have a mystical mission in this planet is to save the animals. We are the only beings capable of thought in this planet, and the ability to imagine better futures and experiences that are actually realizable.

So imagine the following scenario: Higher beings are too perfect to be capable of entering this domain of existence. They are also too diffuse and lack the material density that we have. How would they rescue the beings stuck in the horrors of Darwinian life? Perhaps by communicating and shaping, gradually (as fast as possible!), the minds of human beings.

The invasion of the divine starts with making humans attracted to particular forms of being that are selected for their long term benefits to consciousness. Thus some people acquire preferences aligned to what they consider beautiful and that beauty always refers to configurations of qualia that incite good attributes (in the causal sense of generally producing better results).

Particularly well developed moral beings recognize the pain and suffering in other species as well. This only requires self honesty and intellectual curiosity. But then what? Ability to generalize and solve inconsistencies. All of those attributes are equally liked by the Gods.

They lead, to an unconditional compassion towards all suffering beings (boring!) and the systematic (however strange) application of rationality principles to how to go about enacting those values! I.e. The Abolitionist Project no less.