Filter for homogenity of environment is anthropic selection—if environment is sufficiently heterogeneous, it kills everyone who tries to reach out of its ecological niche, general intelligence doesn’t develop and we are not here to have this conversation.
Nah, there are other methods than intelligence for survival and success. E.g. durability, strength, healing, intuition, tradition, … . Most of these developed before intelligence did.
I mean, we exist and we are at least somewhat intelligent, which implies strong upper bound on heterogenity of environment.
On the other hand, words like “durability” imply possibility of categorization, which itself implies intelligence. If environment is sufficiently heterogenous, you are durable at one second and evaporate at another.
I mean, we exist and we are at least somewhat intelligent, which implies strong upper bound on heterogenity of environment.
We don’t just use intelligence.
On the other hand, words like “durability” imply possibility of categorization, which itself implies intelligence. If environment is sufficiently heterogenous, you are durable at one second and evaporate at another.
???
Vaporization is prevented by outer space which drains away energy.
Not clear why you say durability implies intelligence, surely trees are durable without intelligence.
I feel like I’m failing to convey the level of abstraction I intend to.
I’m not saying that durability of object implies intelligence of object. I’m saying that if the world is ordered in a way that allows existence of distinct durable and non-durable objects, that means the possibility of intelligence which can notice that some objects are durable and some are not and exploit this fact.
If the environment is not ordered enough to contain intelligent beings, it’s probably not ordered enough to contain distinct durable objects too.
To be clear, by “environment” I mean “the entire physics”. When I say “environment not ordered enough” I mean “environment with physical laws chaotic enough to not contain ordered patterns”.
It seems like you are trying to convince me that intelligence exists, which is obviously true and many of my comments rely on it. My position is simply that consequentialism cannot convert intelligence into powerful agency, it can only use intelligence to bypass common obstacles.
If there’s some big object, then it’s quite possible for it to diminish into a large number of similar obstacles, and I’d agree this is where most obstacles come from, to the point where it seems reasonable to say that intelligence can handle almost all obstacles.
However, my assertion wasn’t that intelligence cannot handle almost all obstacles, it was that consequentialism can’t convert intelligence into powerful agency. It’s enough for there to be rare powerful obstacles in order for this to fail.
Filter for homogenity of environment is anthropic selection—if environment is sufficiently heterogeneous, it kills everyone who tries to reach out of its ecological niche, general intelligence doesn’t develop and we are not here to have this conversation.
Nah, there are other methods than intelligence for survival and success. E.g. durability, strength, healing, intuition, tradition, … . Most of these developed before intelligence did.
I mean, we exist and we are at least somewhat intelligent, which implies strong upper bound on heterogenity of environment.
On the other hand, words like “durability” imply possibility of categorization, which itself implies intelligence. If environment is sufficiently heterogenous, you are durable at one second and evaporate at another.
We don’t just use intelligence.
???
Vaporization is prevented by outer space which drains away energy.
Not clear why you say durability implies intelligence, surely trees are durable without intelligence.
I feel like I’m failing to convey the level of abstraction I intend to.
I’m not saying that durability of object implies intelligence of object. I’m saying that if the world is ordered in a way that allows existence of distinct durable and non-durable objects, that means the possibility of intelligence which can notice that some objects are durable and some are not and exploit this fact.
If the environment is not ordered enough to contain intelligent beings, it’s probably not ordered enough to contain distinct durable objects too.
To be clear, by “environment” I mean “the entire physics”. When I say “environment not ordered enough” I mean “environment with physical laws chaotic enough to not contain ordered patterns”.
It seems like you are trying to convince me that intelligence exists, which is obviously true and many of my comments rely on it. My position is simply that consequentialism cannot convert intelligence into powerful agency, it can only use intelligence to bypass common obstacles.
No, my point is that in worlds where intelligence is possible, almost all obstacles are common.
If there’s some big object, then it’s quite possible for it to diminish into a large number of similar obstacles, and I’d agree this is where most obstacles come from, to the point where it seems reasonable to say that intelligence can handle almost all obstacles.
However, my assertion wasn’t that intelligence cannot handle almost all obstacles, it was that consequentialism can’t convert intelligence into powerful agency. It’s enough for there to be rare powerful obstacles in order for this to fail.