Clarifying sapience supremacy: holding values vs. moral dominance in AI ethics
menhguin · x · 2026-09-21
A debate on "sapience supremacy" in AI ethics. The author clarifies that sapience isn't inherently morally superior or entitled to dominance — rather, sapient beings can hold any values and spread or defend them, versus the alternative of no values, so one must "play the cards they have."
The thread also touches on odd conclusions of pure hedonic utilitarianism: there's no clean argument against spending all resources breeding the happiest animals or shoving everyone into a 24/7 dopamine livestream — but that creates a local minimum that's very hard to escape. The author admits the framing risks sounding like "space fascism."
More from AGI Musings
- The demand-saturation question: will ever-new consumer goods keep AI-driven demand growing? — binarybits · 2026-09-21
- binarybits: only the military scenario holds in the AI explosion debate — binarybits · 2026-09-21
- Slowing AI Won't Stop Superintelligence — It'll Lock Intelligence Behind $3T Companies — SucceededMind · 2026-09-21
- Devs clash over whether beginners should still learn to code as AI automates code review — mgill25 · 2026-09-21
- Yacine: 'Programmer' Will Sound as Strange to My Son as Human Computer Does to Me — yacineMTB · 2026-09-21
- OpenAI's Noam Brown: aligned AI workers could hand the edge to incumbents over startups — victor_explore · 2026-09-21