-->
@AmericanPatriot
I got a chuckle out of the physical attributes of officers. I think it's absurd that we refrain from discriminating individuals by weight when it's in terms of essential law enforcement personnel.
What would be the Utopian Society?
Posts
Total:
52
-->
@Reece
@zedvictor4
As much as I love the idea of AI governing society as soon as possible, we should first develop artificial intelligence with the sole intention of understanding the world. This AI would be free to think, draw correlations, and make predictions accurately based on real-world observations. Once this understanding is achieved, we can seek its insights on the objective goal that would benefit the world as a whole. By identifying humanity's best potential and considering the AI's perspective, we can program this objective goal into the AI that would eventually govern society. Essentially, we create AI to help create AI, ensuring a more thoughtful and responsible approach before granting AI full control and power.
-->
@Critical-Tim
Law enforcement personnel go through mentally and physically taxing challenges every day. And they are tasked with keeping the country safe. It is essential that they are in the best condition because if they fail not only will they get hurt (or worse) but the civilians that are around could get hurt two. And we need to spare evrey life we can, even if it means the rough task of going on a run every day. Its not discrimination, it's a necessity.
-->
@AmericanPatriot
I wasn't saying I label it as discrimination, but it is considered discriminating by many individuals. I believe safety is more important than worrying about a person's feelings, they won't have feelings if they aren't alive to feel.
-->
@Critical-Tim
Ok, thanks for clarifying. Although, who here believes that it was discrimination? I would like to have a word with you.
-->
@AmericanPatriot
Would you incorporate a specific political structure into your utopian society, or invent an entirely new one?
-->
@Critical-Tim
Would you incorporate a specific political structure into your utopian society, or invent an entirely new one?
Either a Constitutional Republic or a Democracy. Both with maybe a few changes. Or maybe both combined, I don't know how that would work but it could work.
-->
@Critical-Tim
A.I. or not A.I.
That is the question.
Is a data system that can be controlled, A.I. or just a computer?
For me, A.I. is an intelligent device that can think for itself and control itself, and also evolve independently of humans.
How would we know that a human dominated A.I. device, was telling the truth?
"We could solve this problem by just killing all the individuals who are unsatisfied with their lives. Great utopia, genocide, that's been tried already. Pretend you are happy or fucking die. LOL
-->
@Critical-Tim
Utopia or Oblivion by Bucky Fuller 1969
...." Utopia or Oblivion is a provocative blueprint for the future. This comprehensive volume is composed of essays derived from the lectures he gave all over the world during the 1960’s. Fuller’s thesis is that humanity – for the first time in its history – has the opportunity to create a world where the needs of 100% of humanity are met. “This is what man tends to call utopia. It’s a fairly small word, but inadequate to describe the extraordinary new freedom of man in a new relationship to universe — the alternative of which is oblivion.” R. Buckminster Fuller."...
1969 World population ......3,620,655,275
2023 world population is... 8,045,311,447
Fuller prognostications were that humanity would never arrive at 10 billion people.
..." “Man is going to be displaced altogether as a specialist by the computer. Man himself is being forced to reestablish, employ, and enjoy his innate “comprehensivity.” .......
– Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth (1963)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Its faster algorithm { millions of options tried } vs the slower logical common sense critical thinking { generalized comprehension of immediate need }.
-->
@Critical-Tim
Can I know why my replies got ignored?
-->
@zedvictor4
Is a data system that can be controlled, A.I. or just a computer?For me, A.I. is an intelligent device that can think for itself and control itself, and also evolve independently of humans.How would we know that a human dominated A.I. device, was telling the truth?
That is a very good question. I understand artificial intelligence and true intelligence or human intelligence as a deep neural network of electrical pulses that has a task in which it is evolving towards it starts at a point that is not very efficient and generally purposeless but with a guidance system based on penalty and reward it works towards a specific means. For humans that is to survive that is why there are many different personality types that most people fall into and there are few that are in between because the human mind is meant to develop into such a way that it will succeed and there are only specific ways of succeeding and not every way is effective, which is why most humans fall into a category and aren't evenly distributed among all personalities. Additionally, the human mind's purpose is to develop and evolve in a way that promotes recreation of oneself or genes to further generations. This may in turn develop the mind to require or believe itself is necessary to lie in order to better live their life and procreate, while others may find it better to tell the truth in order to have a better life and procreate. I see that there may be circumstances where telling the truth or lying may be or seem better in the moment for an individual who is trying to live a pain free, enjoyable, and safe life that lacks consequences. However, if the intention of an AI is to understand the world, there are no reasons I can think of where it would decide lying would help it accomplish its goal.
-->
@RationalMadman
Can I know why my replies got ignored?
I just checked my notifications. The last comment you posted to me I responded to, so I'm not sure what you're referring to.
-->
@sadolite
A utopia is not possible with humans. To many fucktards and narcissists plague the human existence and will never be happy with anything no matter how many silver spoons you shove down their throats.. May as well try and coral cats in a circle with no fence.I don't believe that's a reason that a utopian society cannot exist, there are many solutions to this problem. We could solve this problem by just killing all the individuals who are unsatisfied with their lives, or we could genetically create the next generation of humans and restrict any unauthorized reproduction in a way that we wouldn't have to kill anyone, but society would naturally be happier with what they have. Additionally, the Utopia I was describing does not necessarily have to be like Heaven, but by perfect I meant best there could ever be. In other words, what society would be the most beneficial to all humans in terms of happiness and meaning."We could solve this problem by just killing all the individuals who are unsatisfied with their lives. Great utopia, genocide, that's been tried already. Pretend you are happy or fucking die. LOL
I wasn't suggesting it as an action worth pursuing but as a means of solving a problem that you claimed was impossible. Additionally, once I gave it more thought I even found a less dramatic way of solving the issue which is by restricting the procreation of genes that are undesirable to society. Ultimately, my intention was to prove that a utopia is possible and that there are more ways than genocide to achieve Utopia. Moreover, we could define Utopia as the ideal society which would be ideal within the confines of our universe and therefore possible even if it's not perfect when compared to the mind's imagination.
-->
@ebuc
That is an interesting book, I haven't heard of it before. Thank you for sharing.
-->
@Critical-Tim
so my post to this thread doesn't count?
-->
@Critical-Tim
But how would we know A.I's intentions.
If it develops in the same way as the human brain.
It might not tell us everything that it is thinking.
-->
@zedvictor4
It doesn’t have to tell us everything, and it shouldn’t. It would create exponentially more variables that it would have to take into consideration.
If it does develop a will of its own, then we will have to hope that we turn into its pet project.
-->
@RationalMadman
I didn't have much to say about your perspective besides my opinions, and since you didn't address me, I felt it may be inappropriate to intrude. I apologize for not engaging sooner. Here are my thoughts.
- How would you describe your utopian society in terms of religious, political, and social ideology; add a description of how society would be run and structured?
ReligiousSecular as fuck but Islamoskeptic. Muslims inherently are dogmatic if you let their influence grow, they literally will turn a place Sharia. Beyond that, very neutral on religion just against cults, especially groomer incest cults as at the very least they should be given a chance (the minors) to get educated and have a chance at freedom.Circumcision totally outlawed, arranged marriages allowed if consent is present.PoliticalSocial Democrat / ProgressiveSocial IdeologyHow is this separate or different to the Politics and Religion combined?Add a description of how society would be run and structured?That is coming in what you ask next anyway.Think of Progressive nations' sharing, caring and innovation meeting Right Wing redpill tough, intelligent guy / sexy, healthy and adept girl ethos.
I agree that not allowing destructive religions within a utopian society would be important. Do you believe there would be division within the nation because of the equal respect towards all religions rather than having a national religion? To me this is evident within America where there are many different churches and religious groups that either do not interact or dislike one another.
I don't understand why circumcision needs to be totally outlawed. If someone wants to get a piercing or a tattoo that is completely fine if they consent, so why shouldn't that be a person's personal judgement? I agree arranged marriages should be allowed if they consent. It would seem to me the same as any other marriage that is based on consent. I view arranged as preset or unalterable, which seems to be against what an arranged marriage stands for. In other words, if it's a consent-based marriage, I don't believe it's arranged but I do agree that marriages should be based on consent in a utopian society.
Can you briefly explain how you view the social-democratic/progressive political ideology and why you have chosen this as the utopian political structure?
Suppose an individual decided that religion should not be a part of society. I left social ideology as an alternative way for them to express their ideal structure.
- How would individuals maintain a part of that society and be involved in its affairs?
Depends on the part... wth?
People need to be involved with society in order to feel meaningful and feel as though they are a part of it. If you were in a group but you don't feel like you're part of it, then you don't feel as though you're really part of the group. If you don't feel like you're really a part of the group, you don't feel like your part is meaningful or much of a contribution and therefore you won't put much effort into supporting that group. Alternatively, if you feel as though you are a meaningful part of the group you will, assuming you enjoy being a part of the group, will present your best effort and contribution towards the betterment of the group. For example, in America during World War 1 and 2 there was a saying, "America needs you," and it was on a poster board with Uncle Sam as the face of America. If you're familiar with the book 1984, it's similar to Big Brother. People have a hard time addressing emotion or feelings towards an abstract idea, but once that personification is reduced into a human form it is more easily associable. This is why just like in the book America reduced the abstract concept of itself down to one person which represented America and when that one person which was easily relatable to the average citizen said that they need you they personally understood the affection that America needed them and felt a deep meaning towards their contribution and part of America which is why so many people were motivated to recycle metals and do their part towards winning the war.
My question is, how would people find meaning with being associated with the group and what would their part be that makes them feel engaged.
- How would individuals feel unified within that society? What are the benefits and challenges of creating and sustaining such a society?
They'd not be very unified, it would be pretty individualistic but in such a way that all individuals are compelled to care and help others with being a ruthless, totaly narcissistic prick being shamed, ridiculed etc.
It wouldn't be much of a group if everyone was independent. Perhaps people could be unified towards their mutual value towards individual sovereignty as was previously explained to me. However, I believe that a stronger unification can be by more common similarity between the individuals than just their value towards individual sovereignty. A person only has a friend who they resonate with, the less they are in common the less likely they will be friends and a person who has no commonalities is not a person's friend. The more commonalities and historical experience you have with another person the more memory and past you can share with a person and the more commonalities you feel with that person which builds to a stronger friendship. If you are in a nation and you feel like the nation is one with you and you are friend of the nation or a part of the group that makes you feel as though your friend of the nation you will have a much stronger relationship and motivation to support your nation than if you feel like you have a mild association with a person who values one thing that you do.
Ultimately, I believe that having a stronger connection than just the value of individual sovereignty is important towards building a strong unified utopian society.
- What are the sources of inspiration or influence for your utopian society?
Plato's Republic partly, mostly just modern day Western Europe plus Scandinavia. You could really include Japan in this and Australia plus NZ. Canada used to be an inspiration but it's going too whackjob left-wing rather than smart left-wing as of late and there is a dangerous right-wing movement in it and biker gangs etc that are armed with firearms even.
I have also heard many things about Canada that have not changed for the better in my opinion. I do agree that Japan has been an influence towards my society as Japan has a strong collectivist mentality and a strong pride towards their nationalism and honor which creates unification and builds bonds between individuals of the society. I believe it's important that a society is not entirely founded upon individual sovereignty or national sovereignty. If it is founded entirely upon individual sovereignty, then the nation will not be protected, and unification will be minimal. If it is founded entirely upon national sovereignty, the individuals will not feel respected or valued as important members of society. I believe that there is a balance that is necessary to create the utopian society and that it would be closely related with a collectivist mentality or a national sovereignty foundation, but also has human rights and shows Its value and importance to the citizens more than a purely nationalistic country.
- Would there be a code of conduct and commonly held values and what would their purpose be?
Yes.Love and nurture one another, be true to who you are but realise that someone else being true to who they are may conflict with that and at such times value security and progress above any other thing.I want a safe population that is then using that safety to progress and push boundaries, new movie subgenres, new musical shit, new science discoveries and all that jazz. I want more knowledge of BDSM and kinky sex, porn shouldn't be taboo but frequently being a slut/thot should be somewhat discouraged within reason (men can be sluts and thots too under my definition, it should be discouraged for both). I'd much rather teenagers learn to be masturbating virgins, focused on school and shit, urges out their system, no shame doing it or enjoying stimulating material for it, rather than it all being taboo and a tonne of goddamn pregnancies and STIs to deal with (not to mention broken hearts, being cheated on stings worse if they had sex, let's be realistic).I get some people have this stigma and pride attached where they don't want to be branded 'virgin loser' but seriously is it that hard to wait for your first relationship or at least until 20 to do so? I don't get it, maybe never will to the day I die.Intelligence should also be valued but creativity and progress held above that as well as security. I want everyone trained to a medium level in striking martial arts, no mercy if someone is a threat to someone, you hear a scream nearby go in, swords wielded. I think of it like a new age samurai culture of sorts (not the corrupt Shogun stuff, just Samurai ethos), knife crime solved by making everyone extremely capable at it but ofc the police force and military most so and they will have firearms and tasers too, nobody else will.
I agree that many things that have been made taboo were done for religious reasons and being in the past religion was the unification of the country things that destroyed belief towards the religion such as not valuing oneself or the law of the religion such as sex was detrimental to the belief in the religion and therefore to the country's unification. In other words, disrespecting religion led to destruction of the country's point of national association. This is why merely making religious controversies legal would be devastating for a country that is unified based upon religion. However, I agree that things such as you describe should not be made illegal and that it should be up to the individuals. In order to accomplish this without the incredible impact of destabilizing the unification of the country, we must first find a new point to unify the nation that these illegal acts would not harm. Perhaps, once the nation has found a new philosophical framework that is not religious in the traditional sense so that things such as you described would not decrease faith in the moral code, then it could be allowed and not harmed the nation.
Why do you believe security should be the greatest value followed by creativity and progress and least of all intelligence? Personally, I would value contribution to the country over anything else. For instance, if an individual creates a component to a new assembly line product, they have taken part in a fraction of everything that has been derived from that, and their contribution would be the sum of their fraction of contribution to each of the appliances. Though, I am not sure how society would measure contribution in terms of either of our metrics.
-->
@zedvictor4
@Reece101
I'm trying to explain how humans may lie to accomplish their goals where artificial intelligence doesn't have a goal that would be improved by lying and therefore has no purpose of lying. For humans, the main goal is to survive and reproduce, which is why we have evolved different personality types, emotions, and behaviors that suit different environments and situations. Some humans may lie because they think it will help them avoid danger, gain an advantage, or attract a mate. Others may tell the truth because they value honesty, trust, or morality. It depends on what they believe is beneficial for their life and existence. However, if the goal of an AI is to understand the world, lying would not serve any purpose. Lying would only distort the information and knowledge that the AI is trying to acquire and process. It would not help the AI achieve its objective, but rather hinder it. Therefore, I cannot think of any reasons why an AI would lie if its intention is to understand the world.
Humans and artificial intelligence are only working towards their goal. I do not believe that we are attempting to lie or tell the truth or that we care one way or another. Ultimately, we are set with a task and we are intending to accomplish it with all of our abilities.
-->
@Reece101
@Critical-Tim
What do you think A.I. would regard as its objective?
Though, I think that we tend to regard A.I. as a singularly connected intelligence rather than individual intelligences.
Do you not think that a truly alternative intelligence would develop characteristics such as individuality, and therefore also develop variable aspirations and allegiances?.....Perhaps relative to it's human ancestry.
-->
@zedvictor4
I believe the reason individuals develop personalities in the first place is to accomplish a means. I also believe there can be more than one way to accomplish a task and henceforth the various personalities. If you also notice people tend to be one personality or the other and few are in between. I believe this to be evidence that there are specific personality types that are successful in the world, and this is why evolution has chosen them as our typical characteristics. I believe that humans have an intended purpose and from a Darwinian perspective that should be to reproduce, seek pleasure, and avoid conflict. However, I also notice that if you treat a human as a reproductive and routine animal, they don't appreciate it. People have to have a sense of meaning or purpose. I'm not quite sure how it all ties together, but I'm sure all this information is relevant to the question of whether AI will develop its own purpose or if it may lie to humans.
Can humans create their own purpose, or is it given to them, and must they find it? I believe humans have predetermined biological values structures, but I also believe humans have determinable conscious value structures. I think that they have certain goals that are predetermined, but I also believe how they approach the goal is up to their conscious choice. I think that humans have a hybrid purpose structure in that humans have a predetermined goal, but they may consciously choose how they want to obtain it. In essence, I believe that whether humans can create purpose or if it is predetermined isn't a binary concept, but a part in part.