I think this argument only makes sense if you already oppose capital punishment in the first place (which I do, for the record). Like yes, if it turns out that we could have radically extended the lives of death row inmates and failed to do that, then that would be very bad for the inmates. But the entire point of executing someone is that being executed is very bad for you.
(The rehabilitation and isolation arguments already give no reason to prefer execution over prison.)
First, pausing executions matters more now (if there is a meaningful chance of radical life extension or longevity escape velocity) than a pause would without the possibility, because it could save 200 or infinite or whatever years of human life vs say 40 years for a 35 year old. You’re right that this is geared towards those already opposed to capital punishment, but I think that’s ok. It just raises the stakes of every death in the interim.
Second, ASI itself might lead to less retributive thinking, especially if one believes that retribution stems from an improper understanding of free will and blameworthiness, and thinks that improved cognition through ASI enabled cognitive enhancement will allow people to understand more clearly. I am not certain this is true, but if I had to bet, would bet >50% that a smarter population after ASI would be less retributive.
I think this argument only makes sense if you already oppose capital punishment in the first place (which I do, for the record). Like yes, if it turns out that we could have radically extended the lives of death row inmates and failed to do that, then that would be very bad for the inmates. But the entire point of executing someone is that being executed is very bad for you.
(The rehabilitation and isolation arguments already give no reason to prefer execution over prison.)
This is reasonable I think. Two thoughts:
First, pausing executions matters more now (if there is a meaningful chance of radical life extension or longevity escape velocity) than a pause would without the possibility, because it could save 200 or infinite or whatever years of human life vs say 40 years for a 35 year old. You’re right that this is geared towards those already opposed to capital punishment, but I think that’s ok. It just raises the stakes of every death in the interim.
Second, ASI itself might lead to less retributive thinking, especially if one believes that retribution stems from an improper understanding of free will and blameworthiness, and thinks that improved cognition through ASI enabled cognitive enhancement will allow people to understand more clearly. I am not certain this is true, but if I had to bet, would bet >50% that a smarter population after ASI would be less retributive.