Robots Evolve Altruism, Just as Biology Predicts
Ayn Rand denied altruism, and used examples of robots in her "philosophy". How fitting this is as another stake in the heart of that bizarre pseudophilosophy objectivism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Altruists are as natural as parasites, so both should arise when using artificial evolution methods. But truly interesting things start to happen with the emergence of conscious thought and ideas, when parasites start to cloak their true motives under the guise of altruism. In other words, there will always be charity volunteers and thiefs, but what when theives develop an ability to pose as altruists using clever ideas? Note the parasites do not even need to be conscious of the fact. In fact, to achive the highest efficiency as parasites, they should _not_ be conscious of the fact, sort of like Cylons, they need to wholehartedly belive they are the good guys.
And indeed, Rand nor libertarians are not against altruism proper, they are merely against forced altruism (collectivist altruis), which is indistinguishable from slavery run by parasites.
I'll do this backwards. To say that Rand and libertarians are not against altruism "proper" is to lie. Plain and simple, with no rationalizing it possible. I am sure by "proper" you mean according to your own definition, but we will use the standard, less-biased one.
And to mix up the idea of altruism with that of parasitism borders on the delusional. At best.
I really, really can't tell sometimes if the people online talking libertarian silliness are trolls, or if they actually mean it. I know many do mean it, I've known a lot, but it just seems to crazy.
I'm glad that the American people are beginning to see this group (Libertarians, Randroids, radical free-marketeers) as the outcast sociopaths they are. I just hope it's not too late for the country. A lot of people are already suffering because of them.
Altruism is really one of the most beautiful things out there. But only when it really comes from your own heart or mind (what I have called altruism proper, as in Rand's enlightened egoism), not because of social pressure or... physical force (sic!) as collectivists would want. When you think about it, collectivists are precisely the ones who RUIN the very idea of altruism. Collectivists are actually the deadliest enemies of altruism imaginable.
No, Joanna, social insurance of all sorts is a reciprocal altruism.
Mutual defense, provision for education, old age and medical care: these are all social altruisms. We don't have to spout romantic twaddle about how "beautiful" they are: it's patently obvious pretty much everybody values them.
See? "Reciprocal altruism", "social altruisms" etc. Collectivists are pretty well aware their interpretation has nothing to do with altruism proper. If they were actually serious about altruism, they would have to join libertarians.
And yes I know collectivists hate when you call altruism a beautiful thing. They are well aware how ugly their interpretation of altruism really is. All the more important why we should never let parasitic collectivists run slavery society under the guise of altruism. True voluntary altruism will then be lost forever and even non-sentient animals are better than that.
Joanna,
All I can say is that I hope you're either really young, and can grow out of this, or you are pretending. If you really believe the web of nonsense you continue to spin, there's little hope for you in dealing with reality. You're just outright making things up and then claiming others are doing it. It's called projection, and it's just bizarre to see you keep doing it.
This seems like as good a place as any to introduce this video:
Healthcare: Sanders vs Paul
http://youtu.be/YUXwDMqjC-A
MB, we've been analyzing libertarian adolescence as alledged explanation already: http://critiquesofcollectivism.blogspot.com/2011/04/adolescent-collectivists.html
Then keep in mind there is a different explanation altogether:
http://critiquesofcollectivism.blogspot.com/2011/01/bread-butter.html
I couldn't care less about your "analysis", I'm sure it's the same ideology driven nonsense I can find on any libertarian site. I mean, in reference to this site, I've seen libertarians refer to Mike Huben as a "Marxist", which is outright looney.
And, when it comes to adolescence, I wasn't speaking figuratively. I mean, I hope you ARE an adolescent, or at least no older than your early 20s, so that you have time to shake off your blinders and learn to deal with the real world as it is.
Mike Huben said...
No, Joanna, social insurance of all sorts is a reciprocal altruism.
Mutual defense, provision for education, old age and medical care: these are all social altruisms. We don't have to spout romantic twaddle about how "beautiful" they are: it's patently obvious pretty much everybody values them.
_______
There is one altruism -- both individual and social -- of which I disapprove:
Allowing "Libertarians" to freely, and free of charge, post their twaddle, which posting is the equivalent of a "Libertarian" neighbor breaking into one's home, defecating on one's living room rug, and then, beaming with pride, demanding one praise them for that latter magnificent accomplishment.
And on top of that being kind to them for doing so.
My objection to those kindly altruisms doubtless verges on the "Libertarian," as I would, if I could, do entirely without such coercive altruism, which I think self-evidently dis-serves us "collectivists".
Post a Comment