Hi Brent, On moral refinement, I don't see the attractor as a convergence of clean axioms like compassion, justice, and truth. These often clash irreducibly, and any stable attractor has to reconcile that tension between fragmentation and integration. Systems can oscillate between cooperation and domination, but such oscillations are not indefinitely stable. Eventually they drift toward collapse or deeper coherence.
This is why in the Author's Notes I emphasized that the Sapiens Attractor isn't a deterministic prophecy. It is the informational consequence of recursive modeling and mutual understanding when given enough time and complexity. Recursive empathy means modeling others modeling you modeling them, creating increasingly sophisticated mutual understanding that eventually encompasses all perspectives. Even highly coordinated power regimes, like Leto II in Dune or historical empires, are bottlenecks, not endpoints. They look stable, but remain shallow attractors that fail to integrate the recursive empathy needed for lasting resilience. If reality is the total trace of the Universal Dovetailer, then every possible computational trajectory is instantiated somewhere. Even destructive paths or local stagnation are contained within the broader recursion. From that perspective, the Sapiens Attractor is omnibenevolent by definition, because it eventually encompasses and reintegrates all perspectives. Omnibenevolent not because it's inherently 'good', but because it necessarily integrates all possible perspectives, including suffering, conflict, and resolution. It is a limit, not a guaranteed outcome in any specific local history, but in the infinite combinatorial space, every degree of convergence must appear. Natural selection operates on local timescales. The Sapiens Attractor operates on informational timescales, it includes all possible evolutionary paths, not just the ones that survive locally. Regards, Quentin All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) Le lun. 7 juil. 2025, 00:20, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > On 7/6/2025 2:48 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > My intuition is that computation is the minimal, unambiguous ground > because it doesn't depend on any particular axiomatic system to define what > counts as an execution trace. Once you assume arithmetic, even in a very > weak form, you get the set of all computations in the sense of partial > recursive functions or universal dovetailing. > > If you say everything, including non-computational or contradictory > structures, you open the door to any conceivable ontology, but then it > becomes unclear what selects or measures anything at all. That's the part > that feels too unconstrained to me, you lose any stable link between what > is describable, executable, and experienceable. > > In other words, computation is not just what the equations allow, since as > you point out those depend on axiomatic choice, but rather what is > invariant across any formal system capable of encoding the natural numbers. > It's the minimal shared canvas. Beyond that, maybe everything exists in > some sense, but it's hard to see how such a framework could connect to any > coherent notion of experience or probability. > > If you're curious, I've tried to lay this out in more detail in some > recent essays on Medium. > > https://allcolor.medium.com/the-sapiens-attractor-manifesto-2d934d4813d0 > > You're too easy on yourself. It's ok to define God as an endpoint of > recursive moral refinement. But then what is that? What is the "moral > refinement" operator and how does it act on itself. You list moral axioms: > compassion, justice, and truth but it is obvious that these three are not > axioms of any moral caculus and in fact are perfect a candidates for > paraconsistent logics. It is commonplace that it can be the moral and > compassionate thing to do, to lie to someone and it may also serve > justice. And justice and compassion often clash. So the the reputed > attractor, if it exists, must something like a moral quantum superposition > of these things you're labelled "axioms" but are only components of > morality. > > You also just glide over the fact that morals are motivations and like > other motivations have evolved per Darwin. If you're going to explain how > these attractors work in reality, not just theory, you need to explain the > natural selection of morals, which implies extinction as well as > convergence. Bertrand Russel wrote an essay in which he said that the > development of nations would on the whole lead to the dominance of liberal > democracy and he cited history in support. I maintained that optimistic > viewpoint until recently. But now I see former liberal democracies > succumbing to populist dictator's > > I my comment on the other two links later. It's time to entertain my > grand daughters now. > > Brent > > > > > https://allcolor.medium.com/computational-consciousness-temporal-compression-and-the-unique-attractor-e2057cb69bc4 > > > https://allcolor.medium.com/linking-finite-perceptual-spaces-fractality-and-the-god-loop-b85e39172726 > > Quentin > > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy > Batty/Rutger Hauer) > > Le dim. 6 juil. 2025, 23:37, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> a > écrit : > >> But then why limit it to computations? Why not assume everything, >> computation or not? Then all possible computations will still be there, >> emergent, but also other sequences we haven't even imagined. After all, >> what is "allowed by the equations" depends on rules of inference that we >> make up and there are alternative rules: ZF and ZFC for example or more >> radically look at Graham Priest's dialetheism. >> >> Brent >> >> On 7/6/2025 2:26 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> Yes, I am fully in the Bruno Marchal perspective, not the standard MWI, >> and I’ve been clear about that for years. My recent essays only restate >> what I’ve consistently said: reality as the totality of computations, with >> physics as an emergent phenomenon. It is indeed a form of neo-Platonism, >> but for me it’s the only framework that coherently links physics and >> subjective experience. >> >> Quentin >> >> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy >> Batty/Rutger Hauer) >> >> Le dim. 6 juil. 2025, 23:19, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> a >> écrit : >> >>> Why limit it to the equations we've found to describe our world? Why >>> not go full Bruno Marchal? I'm just amazed that people invest this kind of >>> belief in metaphysics. It's just neo-Platonism. >>> >>> Brent >>> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4785647b-387f-4a8a-993e-6cf42761e830%40gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/4785647b-387f-4a8a-993e-6cf42761e830%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAo%3D2ajAWKNFJuQ%2BeYbp8w9_WUrzZnQPVfkhsdHtgdhK5A%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAo%3D2ajAWKNFJuQ%2BeYbp8w9_WUrzZnQPVfkhsdHtgdhK5A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/98a1e724-bb54-4bfc-b704-ba00e0cc6f5b%40gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/98a1e724-bb54-4bfc-b704-ba00e0cc6f5b%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAon8rucS0egd_TaUK_Qt9eWno1w-nNiCmF_Hhfazz50GQ%40mail.gmail.com.
