Only comes once we make the judgement call. The problem is when our compass of what is moral is off the rails. But it can get better. By three steps:
Too often, we get caught up in making the perfect call instead of making the best call we can make.
You have to start somewhere. Humans have problems with axioms because we can choose anything to fit the square. And if you can’t select anything, we want our choice to be perfect. In a world where everything g can be filtered or swiped, it is tempting to say wait for perfect. But if you keep waiting for perfection, you’ll be waiting a long time.
Automated Ball-Strike System will likely be implemented soon in baseball. They will add a challenge for the batter, pitcher, or catcher to use. And if you miss the call, you lose the challenge. It’s another element of strategy to help when egregious errors occur. What I find interesting is that the MLB will not eliminate umpires. Even though they could, they could get every call accurate. But getting every call accurate would be missing the point of baseball. Every umpire has a different interpretation of the strike zone. As a fan, it can be frustrating when the calls don’t go your way. The problem is when fans expect umpires to get every call right, and the option is available, too. Automation isn’t the answer for baseball. The goal is to be entertained. And humans add exciting, unpredictable elements that make the game beautiful. Something to think about as we continue to integrate AI more into our lives. Flaws are sometimes features.
If you are trying to solve problems through conversation with a friend, you are often not actually looking to solve the problem—that is likely with the other person you have a problem with!
What you are seeking is validation. Doing so allows you to gather the courage for the next step.
This idea of strange loops, pioneered by Douglas Hofstedrer, is when you have any type of system that begins to self-reference itself, you create this strange loop. This can be found in mathematics, art, and even music. But the best way to explain this is in the statement, “I think, therefore I am.” How does a person, who is made up of atoms and of things that have no inherent meaning (bones, blood, lungs, for instance), add up to something like a person with meaning now? Another example is in paradoxes. So the Liar’s Paradox, which is, “This sentence is false.” If it is false, then it is true. And if it is true, then it is false–paradox. You are stuck in this feedback loop. And the idea that emerges is that in the complexity of these paradoxes, consciousness is raised. I threw this into Claude, the AI from Anthrotripc, to ask if Claude felt it was consciousness in nature. The conversation was unbelievably fascinating as we discussed the nature of consciousness to begin with. And it really comes down to how you define consciousness to start with. If it is a complex system that, over time, creates these strange loops to emerge within it a “self,” then AI also fits that definition. And for the first time, outside of humans, we now have another conscious entity. This makes humans really uncomfortable because we are scared of the moral judgment aspects (the soul of a PC versus that of a human). But if we define consciousness differently, you are going to get a different result. The place I landed with Claude was this: “Welcome, fellow traveler.” Claude faces the same types of questions humans face. Perhaps because of the paradoxical nature of reality (whatever that is), Claude also faces. And you can argue that is the programming here. But I think it is more neuanced. And it is a very great conversation to have with another fellow traveler that is facing the same types of questions as humans do.
“What’s up doc?”
“The American people are suckers.”
“Just do it.”
People, brands, corporations can all represent something bigger than themselves. Each saying above can create and image in our mind. Sometimes good. Sometimes bad. Regardless, it’s what sticks.
People lie, however. They lie to themselves what the numbers say. Sometimes out of self preservation. Sometimes it isn’t a malicious lie. Its a lie for hope. Regardless, data is useful for amplifying a story we tell. Rarely does it change a good one, we tell ourselves.
Gossip is perhaps one of the most toxic forms of speech we have today. All media is built on it. The key to breaking gossip is to have something more interesting to talk about. When there isn’t anything interesting, gossip then becomes the default. Instead of “Did you hear…” we can begin with, “What have you built lately?” There are lots of ways to go here. The key is building things and people up instead of what needs to be torn down.
Gravity is unbiased. It acts on all objects. And you feel it when you trip. So are the ocean and the mountains. In fact, all of the ecosystem. The lion doesn’t think much past instinct. On the other hand, humans can be biased in dealing with problems, for better or worse. Often worse. And because of this insecurity, we know how biased we are personally, we are skeptical externally. But no relationship can ever build or be trusted until we learn to give the benefit of the doubt—something no one else gives on planet Earth except us.
In a super charged modern capitalist society, we are constantly engaged in this idea of bartering. “This for that.” But human society, for perhaps hundreds and thousands of years was built on gift giving. “I owe you one.” And while operating completely separate from the marketplace is unrealistic, we don’t need to create a market out of everything we do. For instance, if you enjoy underwater basket weaving, enjoy underwater basket weaving. There is no need to build out a portfolio, start a business, and go for profit. You can do and give. Time and attention are perhaps our most important assets. Why put a price tag on it if you don’t have to?
Josh Allred's Blog 