There’s a pretty big distinction between freedom of thought and freedom of expression. There’s lots of things I think that I believe would cause harm to say or act on. Your concerns seem to be about action (altering others by spreading information or torturing a simulation) rather than thought (internally considering the consequences of torturing a sim).
If you really want to explore whether other agents’ freedom of thought is important to you, a better example is whether it’s permitted to create an AI or SIM from which you’ve intentionally removed the ability to think or want certain things.
My answer is that there’s no such thing as a universal right, but I value diversity of thought and expression pretty highly. There’s quite a wide variance in how others answer.
The point is that a mind is potentially a simulator of other minds, and when it comes to sims, that there isn’t really a line between thought and action.
Your concerns seem to be about action (altering others by spreading information or torturing a simulation) rather than thought (internally considering the consequences of torturing a sim).
This assumes mind-body dualism. It’s a very flawed model of the world. Your body reacts to your thoughts. Not enough for reading your thoughts word for word, but enough that the thoughts matter. If you are with a person and think about causing that person pain, that changes subtle things about your bodylanguage towards that person.
I suppose you’re right: thinking is doing. It’s a lot more quiet than the actions given in the examples, and has correspondingly less capacity for harm.
There’s a pretty big distinction between freedom of thought and freedom of expression. There’s lots of things I think that I believe would cause harm to say or act on. Your concerns seem to be about action (altering others by spreading information or torturing a simulation) rather than thought (internally considering the consequences of torturing a sim).
If you really want to explore whether other agents’ freedom of thought is important to you, a better example is whether it’s permitted to create an AI or SIM from which you’ve intentionally removed the ability to think or want certain things.
My answer is that there’s no such thing as a universal right, but I value diversity of thought and expression pretty highly. There’s quite a wide variance in how others answer.
The point is that a mind is potentially a simulator of other minds, and when it comes to sims, that there isn’t really a line between thought and action.
This assumes mind-body dualism. It’s a very flawed model of the world. Your body reacts to your thoughts. Not enough for reading your thoughts word for word, but enough that the thoughts matter. If you are with a person and think about causing that person pain, that changes subtle things about your bodylanguage towards that person.
I suppose you’re right: thinking is doing. It’s a lot more quiet than the actions given in the examples, and has correspondingly less capacity for harm.