First, this article is very well articulated, which is quite the feat considering the wide array of topics it covers. Bravo, FalseCogs. And the perspective of increasing entropy as the end-goal of life, instead of a detriment to it, is original.
I will start with what I agree with in this article. First, organizing society into organ-agent-system levels seems like a good start in organizing a myriad of phenomena that make up life. I agree that each of these levels serve each other, because if they did not, the higher levels would cease to exist. (Examples of this would be heart failure for the organ-agent level or the behaviors of solitary animals, like for the agent-system level. An example for the latter is the jaguar, whom is only social to mate. Because of this, they lack the survival benefits of being in a social group.)
Now, I have a few questions. Please correct me if these questions misunderstand your article
Why do you attribute “life” to having a goal? Wouldn’t that be a personification of life, which I think is wrong since science has show us the indifference of matter to everything other than the laws of nature?
What evidence do you have of strong AI being able to exist?
Given that the strong AI exists, what if the strong narrow AI determines that life does not want humanity to exist? Should that be the goal of the strong, general AI?
First, this article is very well articulated, which is quite the feat considering the wide array of topics it covers. Bravo, FalseCogs. And the perspective of increasing entropy as the end-goal of life, instead of a detriment to it, is original.
I will start with what I agree with in this article. First, organizing society into organ-agent-system levels seems like a good start in organizing a myriad of phenomena that make up life. I agree that each of these levels serve each other, because if they did not, the higher levels would cease to exist. (Examples of this would be heart failure for the organ-agent level or the behaviors of solitary animals, like for the agent-system level. An example for the latter is the jaguar, whom is only social to mate. Because of this, they lack the survival benefits of being in a social group.)
Now, I have a few questions. Please correct me if these questions misunderstand your article
Why do you attribute “life” to having a goal? Wouldn’t that be a personification of life, which I think is wrong since science has show us the indifference of matter to everything other than the laws of nature?
What evidence do you have of strong AI being able to exist?
Given that the strong AI exists, what if the strong narrow AI determines that life does not want humanity to exist? Should that be the goal of the strong, general AI?