←back to thread

LLM Inevitabilism

(tomrenner.com)
1629 points SwoopsFromAbove | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.242s | source
Show context
keiferski ◴[] No.44568304[source]
One of the negative consequences of the “modern secular age” is that many very intelligent, thoughtful people feel justified in brushing away millennia of philosophical and religious thought because they deem it outdated or no longer relevant. (The book A Secular Age is a great read on this, btw, I think I’ve recommended it here on HN at least half a dozen times.)

And so a result of this is that they fail to notice the same recurring psychological patterns that underly thoughts about how the world is, and how it will be in the future - and then adjust their positions because of this awareness.

For example - this AI inevitabilism stuff is not dissimilar to many ideas originally from the Reformation, like predestination. The notion that history is just on some inevitable pre-planned path is not a new idea, except now the actor has changed from God to technology. On a psychological level it’s the same thing: an offloading of freedom and responsibility to a powerful, vaguely defined force that may or may not exist outside the collective minds of human society.

replies(15): >>44568532 #>>44568602 #>>44568862 #>>44568899 #>>44569025 #>>44569218 #>>44569429 #>>44571000 #>>44571224 #>>44571418 #>>44572498 #>>44573222 #>>44573302 #>>44578191 #>>44578192 #
evantbyrne ◴[] No.44571000[source]
I'm pretty bearish on the idea that AGI is going to take off anytime soon, but I read a significant amount of theology growing up and I would not describe the popular essays from e.g., LessWrong as religious in nature. I also would not describe them as appearing poorly read. The whole "look they just have a new god!" is a common trope in religious apologetics that is usually just meant to distract from the author's own poorly constructed beliefs. Perhaps such a comparison is apt for some people in the inevitable AGI camp, but their worst arguments are not where we should be focusing.
replies(7): >>44571085 #>>44571353 #>>44571601 #>>44572817 #>>44572976 #>>44574689 #>>44576484 #
miningape ◴[] No.44571353[source]
While it's a fair criticism, just because someone doesn't believe in a god doesn't mean the religious hardware in their brain has been turned off. It's still there and operational - I don't think it's a surprise that this hardware's attention would then be automatically tuned to a different topic.

I think you can also see this in the intensification of political discussion, which has a similar intensity to religious discussions 100-200+ years ago (i.e. Protestant reformation). Indicating that this "religious hardware" has shifted domains to the realm of politics. I believe this shift can also be seen through the intense actions and rhetoric we saw in the mid-20th century.

You can also look at all of these new age "religions" (spiritualism, horoscopes, etc.) as that religious hardware searching for something to operate on in the absence of traditional religion.

replies(3): >>44571788 #>>44572896 #>>44579463 #
1. uncircle ◴[] No.44579463[source]
> While it's a fair criticism, just because someone doesn't believe in a god doesn't mean the religious hardware in their brain has been turned off.

Max Stirner said that after the Enlightenment and the growth of liberalism, which is still very much in vogue to this day, all we’ve done is replace the idea of God with the idea of Man.

The object might be different, but it is still the unshakable belief in an idealised and subjective truth, with its own rituals and ministers i.e a religion.

I guess the Silicon Valley hyper-technological optimism of the past years is yet another shift from Man to religious belief in the Machine.