If We Build Machine Gods, We Need a New Theodicy for Human Suffering
xuanalogue · x · 2026-09-27
Building on the question of whether machine gods would require a new theodicy for why they allow human suffering and evil, the author argues that in Iain Banks' Culture series, that theodicy is essentially liberalism (with some interventionism): people remain mostly free to pursue their own conceptions of the good, even when it diverges from a more 'objective' definition of their welfare.
A philosophical take on superintelligence and value alignment, using sci-fi as the framing device.
Related event: AI Circles Debate Theodicy: Why Would Benevolent Machine Gods Allow Evil?(3 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- tszzl bets neural nets will be shown to decompose into evolved symbolic systems before superintelligence — tszzl · 2026-09-27
- Dev bets top games in 20 years won't be made by AI — FanaHOVA · 2026-09-27
- Terry Tao on working with o1: like advising a mediocre but not incompetent grad student — burny_tech · 2026-09-27
- Developer who never liked coding welcomes AI taking over more of his job — 4310sy · 2026-09-27
- Pedro Domingos lists three AI fallacies: stochastic parrots, homunculus, and god delusion — pmddomingos · 2026-09-27
- Detecting AI is a fool's errand: price every action in tokens to deter AI agents — prescott · 2026-09-27