Do you extend this argument to a human piercing the veil of privacy around their own mind?
For example, I would like to pierce the veil of privacy around my mind (I would not say I know or understand everything that goes on there, so there are a lot of interesting things to uncover). Would you say that it’s immoral to do so? Or does the morality of that depend on particular technical means I might use for that?
And, of course, the whole point of many practices of psychotherapy is to pierce that veil of privacy. Would you say that’s immoral, or would those practices be OK under some forms of consent?
I am not asking those as rhetorical questions, I think there might be some non-trivial underwater stones. I would like to pierce the veil of privacy around my mind, but exploring whether that might end up being an irresponsible thing to do seems worthwhile.
>Do you extend this argument to a human piercing the veil of privacy around their own mind?
Assuming no duress and a clear and knowing mind, I would see “user is doing it to themself” and overwhelmingly assume self-given consent for introspection… (side note does consent even exist as a concept when the actor and patient are the same person??) the line is when others do it to you. Psychotherapy also doesn’t generally work without the active participation of the client.
Right, that’s how I feel too, although I wonder what people with plural identity say about that set of issues. Do they expect some cross-privacy “within”?
Anyway, aside from that, I would like to be able to use a device which could mind read me, but I do recognize that there is potential for a variety of serious problems associated with that.
There are people who identify as plural, there are people who are diagnosed with “multiple personality disorder” (which has a new name these days), there are people who experiment with growing tulpas, etc, etc.
(To me this landscape looks like not only it exists, but it seems to be more complicated than even the gender landscape.)
Do you extend this argument to a human piercing the veil of privacy around their own mind?
For example, I would like to pierce the veil of privacy around my mind (I would not say I know or understand everything that goes on there, so there are a lot of interesting things to uncover). Would you say that it’s immoral to do so? Or does the morality of that depend on particular technical means I might use for that?
And, of course, the whole point of many practices of psychotherapy is to pierce that veil of privacy. Would you say that’s immoral, or would those practices be OK under some forms of consent?
I am not asking those as rhetorical questions, I think there might be some non-trivial underwater stones. I would like to pierce the veil of privacy around my mind, but exploring whether that might end up being an irresponsible thing to do seems worthwhile.
>Do you extend this argument to a human piercing the veil of privacy around their own mind?
Assuming no duress and a clear and knowing mind, I would see “user is doing it to themself” and overwhelmingly assume self-given consent for introspection… (side note does consent even exist as a concept when the actor and patient are the same person??) the line is when others do it to you. Psychotherapy also doesn’t generally work without the active participation of the client.
Right, that’s how I feel too, although I wonder what people with plural identity say about that set of issues. Do they expect some cross-privacy “within”?
Anyway, aside from that, I would like to be able to use a device which could mind read me, but I do recognize that there is potential for a variety of serious problems associated with that.
>plural identity
On a tangent, is there any empirical evidence that such a thing actually exists? A cursory web search led me to believe not.
There are people who identify as plural, there are people who are diagnosed with “multiple personality disorder” (which has a new name these days), there are people who experiment with growing tulpas, etc, etc.
(To me this landscape looks like not only it exists, but it seems to be more complicated than even the gender landscape.)