SASafrass, How could I have forgotten Nicholas??? I would have relished reading dozens of books about his adventures.
I do believe we are in agreement, with just enough nuances to suggest some wonderful conversations if we ever find ourselves in physical proximity again. IMO, human potential is just a localized, maybe somewhat specialized, expression of Life's potential and consciousness/intelligence is universal. One of the nuances—I think I am more pessimistic about "groups of humans" being on a transcendent path. Reading David Graeber makes me think we are kind of an opposite path; from far more optimal forms of social organization in the past to the degenerate power-politics/rapacious-capitalism of today. But would be very happy to see a brighter side to this coin You mentioned RAH's candy coat of feminism surrounding a chocolate core of misogyny. I too detected that in his writing. The only female characters that seemed somewhat immune were Jubal's three amenuenses, especially Ann the Fair Witness. I was a member of the Church of All Worlds, almost from its beginning, circa 1963. When I went to Macalester in St. Paul, I became a member of the Lady of the Lakes Nest, circa 1969. It was always interesting to me how CAW rapidly transformed from the 'free love promiscuity" male fantasies in *Stranger* to an organization almost exclusively characterized by Goddess/Gaia worship. Just an aside (a deep dark confession??), preceding my infatuation with the SF heroes I mentioned, my very first hero was Lex Luthor in the Superman comics. davew On Wed, Jun 4, 2025, at 2:19 PM, steve smith wrote: > DaveW - > > I do know that we are definitely aligned (you and I) in our (early) reading > choices/habits and probably our (at least early) consequential tendencies and > biases and the heroes of Van Vogt and Brunner and the unmentioned Nicholas > van Rijn of Poul Anderson? > > Where we might diverge is in my latent *self-loathing-liberal* sympathies > with all things not-me... through my youthful embrace of hyper-individualism > (still habitual in many contexts) I came to see some of it's folly and/or > toxicity. RAH's (via LL's voice) admonition to "be able to lead" and "to be > able to follow" were a good leavening to the heavy starch of > hyper-individualistic self-reliance and his neo-western (pseudo-Martian) > Vedic metaphysics in "Stranger") but ultimately he still left me chafing at > the hyper-human-chauvanism and misplaced superficial elevation of women (and > likely others underspecified) in a fundamentally misogynistic mode/style. > > I do agree that there is "a lot more to being human" than any known > reductionist conception/description really seems to begin to expose. The > demonstration-by-example of AI (particularly in the form of LLMs and image > transformers) does put that in stark contrast. Where we may differ is that > I (am willing to consider?) believe that all that makes us so wonderfully > "exceptional" is merely an extension of what makes life itself and all things > "emergent" qualitatively new at every level of reconsideration/expression and > that our expression-through-tech is just another turn of that wheel of > incarnation. > > I do believe, for example, that for all our follies as *groups of humans* we > are on a road to something that transcends what any given human can or does > do. And I believe that the "technical" embedding of same, whether it is the > writings of the Sacred Texts (or great books) or the intricate web of rules > and regulations and practices and norms that make up institutions (political, > religious, academic, ...) can embody and express this. All things digital > and computational are (to me) merely hyper-facilitators of the same, and > therefore *capable* of achieving quantitative thresholds which allow for the > (inevitable) emergence of qualitatative differences which make a difference. > > While I am enamored (enraptured/ensorcled) to some degree with LLMs, I don't > absolutely need to impute onto them anything like the implied level of > *consciousness* I myself experience in spite of them being *extremely* > capable *stochastic parrots* (at the absolute very least?). But that is far > from me wanting to declare that they absolutely do not represent a > proto-version or a step-along-the-way. > > I am also acutely not-a-fan of being educated by (or educating) others, but > rather revel in the possibilities of co-development *with* others, up to and > including the uncanny-valleyed familiarity of LLMs. Can I individually or > we collectively so-evolve, co-emerge, co-arise en-symbiosis, en-mutuality > *with* this golem we have formed from the electron-infused silicon-wafer clay > of the earth? > > I suspect you don't disagree in principle with much of what I am saying here? > The differences may be in detail and style. > > - SASsafrass > >> I agree. >> >> Of course, Lazurus was immortal (having fathered himself) and had time to >> learn all those skills. But why those skills and not a host of others? >> >> I too am a product of RAH, having read his entire corpus multiple times. >> However, my personal heroes tended to be Jubal Harshaw, Valentine Smith, >> Bernardo de la Paz, and even Mycroft (Mike) more than Lazurus. And these >> blended well with A.E. van Vogt's heros Gilbert Gosseyn (World of Null-A) >> and Eliot Grosvenor (Voyage of the Space Beagle), and Brunner's heroes, Nick >> Hafflinger (Shockwave Rider) and Lex (Polymath). These led to my early >> dedication to "know everything and experience (at least once) everything." >> Alexei Panshin's novel, Rite of Passage and its discussion of "ordinology" >> and "synthesis" as professions was also very influential. >> >> I am not so much a believer in human exceptionalism as I am convinced that >> there is a lot more to being human and for human potential than what is >> usually recognized. [AI advocates not only fail to recognize, but deny the >> possibility.] This is probably a result of my involvement in the Human >> Potential Movement when an undergraduate and with Mitchell's (the astronaut) >> Noetic Institute. >> >> All of this is background to one of my consuming interests of the moment: >> how to facilitate the "education" of human beings. Educate is in quotes >> because it is a poor approximation of what I mean: a synthesis of >> enculturation, facilitated self-learning, exploration, ... All influenced >> by experiments like Summerhill and the earlier, non-Christian-centric, >> Paidiea movement. >> >> davew >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 4, 2025, at 10:26 AM, steve smith wrote: >>> DaveW, et alia - >>>> T*he Alignment Problem*, by Brian Christian >>> I would say that Christian's piece here acutely represents what I'm trying >>> to re-conceive, at least for myself. His implications of *Human >>> Exceptionalism* and a very technocentric focus which largely avoids deeper >>> political critiques about who gets to define "alignment" and whose values >>> are prioritized. It is a bias oft-presented by those of us who are >>> tech-focused/capable/advantaged to reduce a problem to one we think we know >>> how to solve (in a manner that promotes our narrow personal interests). >>> >>> In the spirit of "anti-hubris", I was once strongly aligned with Robert >>> Heinlein's (RAH) "Human Chauvanist" or "Human Exceptionalism" perspective >>> as exhibited in his Lazarus Long (LL) character's oft-quoted line: >>> >>>> *"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, >>>> butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance >>>> accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give >>>> orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, >>>> pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, >>>> die gallantly. * *Specialization is for insects."* >>>> >>> I can't say I don't still endorse the optimistic aspirations inspired by >>> LL's statement, it is the "should" that I am disturbed by. I am a fan of >>> generalism but in our modern society, acknowledge that many if not most of >>> us are in fact relatively specialized by circumstance and even by plan and >>> while we might *aspire* to develop many of the skills LL prescribes for us, >>> it should not be a source of shame or of "lesser" that we might not be as >>> broadly capable as implied. We are a social species and while I cringe >>> at becoming (more) eusocial than we already are, I also cringe at the >>> conceit of being order 10B selfish (greedy?) individual agents with long >>> levers, prying one another out of our various happy places willy nilly. >>> >>> I also think the *hubris* aspect is central. One of the major >>> consequences of my own "origin story" foreshadowed by my over-indulgence in >>> techno-optimistic SciFi of the "good old fashioned future" style and >>> particular RAH's work was that he reinforced my Dunning-Kruger tendencies, >>> both by over-estimating my own abilities at specific tasks and narrowed my >>> values to focus on those things which I was already good at or had a >>> natural advantage with. As a developing young person I had a larger-than >>> average physicality and a greater-than-average linguistic facility, so it >>> was easy for me to think that the myriad things that were intrinsically >>> easier for me based on those biases were somehow more "important" than >>> those for which those things might be a handicap? I still have these >>> biases but try to calibrate for them when I can. >>> >>> My first "furrin" car (73 Honda Civic) was a nightmare for me to work on >>> because my hands were too big to fit down between the gaps amongst all the >>> hoses and belts and wires that (even that early) smog-resistant epi-systems >>> layered onto a 45mpg tiny vehicle such as that. And you are all familiar >>> with my circumloquacious style exemplified by "I know you believe you >>> understand what you think I said, but I don't think you realize that what >>> you heard was not what I meant". While I might have been able to break a >>> siezed or rusty bolt loose on my (first car) 64-Tbird or (first truck) 68 >>> F100 without undue mechanical leverage it was hell to even replace spark >>> plugs or re-attach an errant vacuum line on my Honda. And while I might >>> be able to meet most of my HS teachers on a level playing field with >>> complex sentence constructions (or deconstructions) or logical >>> convolutions, the same tendency made me a minor pariah among some of my >>> peers. >>> >>> Back to "alignment" and AI, I would claim that human institutions and >>> bureaucracy are a proto-instantiation of AI/ML, encoding into >>> (semi)automated systems the collective will and values of a culture. Of >>> course, they often encode (amplify) those of an elite few (monarchy, >>> oligarchy, etc) which means that they really do present to the masses as an >>> onerous and oppressive system. In a well functioning political (or >>> religious) system the institutional mechanisms actually faithfully >>> represent and execute the values and the intentions of those who "own" the >>> system, so as-by-design, the better it works, the more oppressed and >>> exploited the citizenry (subjects) are. We should be *very* afraid of >>> AI/ML making this yet-more efficient at such oppression and exploitation >>> *because* we made it in our own (royalty/oligarchic) image, not because it >>> can amplify our best acts and instincts (also an outcome as perhaps assumed >>> by Pieter and Marcus and most of us often-times). >>> >>> I don't trust (assume) the first-order emergent "alignment" of AI (as >>> currently exemplified by LLMs presented through chatBot interfaces) to do >>> anything but amplify the existing biases that human systems (including pop >>> culture) exhibit. Even Democracy which we hold up quite high (not to >>> mention Free Markets, Capitalism, and even hyperConsumerism,and >>> hyperPopulism) is an abberant expression of whatever collective human good >>> might be... it tends to represent the extrema (hyper fringe, or >>> hyper-centroid) better than the full spectral distribution or any given >>> interest really. An ill-concieved, human-exceptionalist (esp. first >>> world, techno-enhanced, wealthy, "human-centricity") giant lever is likely >>> to break things (like the third world, non-human species, the biosphere, >>> the climate) without regard to the fact that to whatever extend we are an >>> "apex intelligence" or "apex consciousness", we are entirely stacked on top >>> of those other things we variously ignore/dismiss/revile as >>> base/banal/unkempt. >>> >>> Elno's aspiration to help (make?) us climb out of the walls of the >>> petri-dish that is Terra into that of Ares (Mars) to escape the >>> consequences of our own inability to self-regulate is the perfect example >>> of human-exceptionalist-hubris gone wrong. Perhaps the conceit is that we >>> can literally divorce ourselves from the broad based support that a stacked >>> geo/hydro/cryo/atmo/biospheric (eco)system provides us and live entirely on >>> top of a techno-base (Asteroid mining Belter fantasies even moreso than >>> Mars/Lunar/Venus/Belter Colonists?). ExoPlanetarian expansion is >>> inevitable for humanity (barring total premature self-destruction) but >>> focusing as much of our resources in that direction (ala Musk, especially >>> fueled by MAGA alignment in a MAGA-entrained fascist industrial-state?) as >>> we might be on the path to is it's own folly. The DOGE-style MAGA-aligned >>> doing so by using humble humans (and all of nature?) as >>> reaction-mass/ejecta is a moral tragedy and fundamentally self-negating. >>> Bannon and Miller and Musk and Navarro and Noem and ... and the entire >>> Trump clan (including Melania and Barron?) are probably quite proud of that >>> consequence, it is not "unintended at all" but I suspect the average >>> Red-Hat-too-tight folks might not be so proud of the human suffering such >>> will cause. >>> >>> Maybe those chickens (the ones not destroyed in industrial >>> egg-production-gone-wrong) are coming home to roost? Veterans services, >>> health-care-for-the-many, rural infrastructure development, humble family >>> businesses, etc might be on the verge of failure/destruction in the name of >>> concentrating wealth in Golf Resorts, Royal Families, and Space >>> Adventurers pockets? Or maybe we are generally resilient to carry all of >>> that on our backs (with AI to help us orchestrate/choregraph more finely)? >>> Many hands/heads/bodies make light work even if it is not righteous (see >>> pyramids?) >>> >>> >>> >>> Bah Humbug! >>> >>> - Steve >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / >>> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. >>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >>> archives: 5/2017 thru present >>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >>> >>> >>> *Attachments:* >>> • OpenPGP_0xD5BAF94F88AFFA63.asc >>> • OpenPGP_signature.asc >> >> >> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / >> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom >> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam >> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >> archives: 5/2017 thru present >> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... > --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > > > *Attachments:* > • OpenPGP_0xD5BAF94F88AFFA63.asc > • OpenPGP_signature.asc
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
