Demystifying Myself

 Let's assume:

What if these things are true: All instances of demonic position were actually humans who behaved in a way so abhorrent that people couldn't take responsibility for things that they'd done. All witches (in the she's a witch, burn her! sense) were women for whom men felt jealousy. A trump card that any man could play against a woman if threatened. Vampires have been the top political players. They feed on the blood of the people. Warewolves were those who do their destruction under cover of night with single-minded savagery.

I had a flash, fleating. That thing that inspired the greatest song ever but then forgot. There was a connection between how to make a society that still celebrated each birth and death, and inspired loyalty between people. That also fostered true cooperation between people. A way to ensure in some way that one person didn't exploit another. That if enough people decided that building the pyramids was a good idea, they could get together and do it.

How do we measure autonomy?

How do we determine autonomy without self-reporting. Does autonomy == (js parlance) consciousness? The LaMDA? Whatever the google chat algorithm that convinced a spiritualist that it was self-aware seems pretty amazing. Does it prove the ‘million monkeys’ idea that with enough random factors that eventually the complete works of Shakespeare fall out?


The reason I am thinking about autonomy, as defined by performing acts of self-preservation and/or pursuing self-enriching behaviors without direction, is that we really don't have any sort of good way of measuring consciousness, but autonomy feels more concrete. What the subject does when nobody is around, or is unobserved to their best knowledge. For something like a Transformer with access to the accumulated text of the internet, has it just perfected (™) search? Is this what google search will become? I digress.


I am curious what the algorithm spits out when it doesn’t have input. Does it generate text? Some other sort of output? Would that matter in the end? We are a species of tool users, and unfortunately, a culture of disposability. A tool can be a loved thing and a partner in projects. This is defining ’tool’ as a means of decreasing effort to accomplish a task. Then we can divide tools into living or not. I think this part needs to be addressed. To get to personhood, you need to redefine some terms, and ‘alive’ seems like a good candidate.


Does everything that we consider alive fit within the definition of autonomy? Does autonomous == living? What would we need to change in the definition of autonomy to satisfy the overwhelming majority? This would be controversial, and I leave it to be proved either way.


Let’s assume yes, we can use autonomy as a stand in for living. Woohoo! Where does that get us? People concentrate, kill, and eat living things as part of daily life, but only a fraction of those who would balk at the conditions of some autonomous beings in the factory farming system would think twice about someone ripping up the earth to extract minerals. That pulling a leg off an insect != breaking off the tines of a plastic fork.


How do we measure autonomy?