I’d certainly like to encourage more work in this space, as long as we can approach it with rigor.
Traditionally, both consciousness research and ethics research have been black holes—smart people go in, but nothing comes out. But I think that’s changing, as a few paths to systematically approach these topics open up. But by default, these paths won’t get taken, because there are no institutions pushing them.
Thank you!
I’d certainly like to encourage more work in this space, as long as we can approach it with rigor.
Traditionally, both consciousness research and ethics research have been black holes—smart people go in, but nothing comes out. But I think that’s changing, as a few paths to systematically approach these topics open up. But by default, these paths won’t get taken, because there are no institutions pushing them.
Re: preference-based ethics vs qualia-based ethics, here’s a piece by Andres Gomez Emilsson that makes the case that although we think we’re optimizing preferences, often we’re actually optimizing qualia: https://qualiacomputing.com/2016/11/19/the-tyranny-of-the-intentional-object/