“The pro-extinctionist view,” they say, “immediately conjures up for a lot of people the image of a homicidal, ghoulish, sadistic maniac, but actually most pro-extinctionists would say that most ways of going extinct would be absolutely unacceptable. But what if everybody decided not to have children? I don’t see anything wrong with that.”

Torres has just written a book called Human Extinction: A History of the Science and Ethics of Annihilation...

Longtermism is a relatively new branch of moral philosophy that has proved particularly popular in Silicon Valley – Elon Musk, for example, has said that it is a close match to his philosophy. Its proponents include Nick Bostrom, who set up the Future of Humanity Institute (FHI) at Oxford, Toby Ord, author of The Precipice, and William MacAskill, author of What We Owe the Future, both of whom have connections to the FHI...

It’s a strand of thought that grew out of the effective altruism movement, which aims to maximise the good done to other people, encouraging followers to seek employment in well-paid jobs such as finance, and then to donate a large chunk of their money to charitable causes. Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of the cryptocurrency exchange FTX, who has been charged with fraud and money laundering, was mentored by MacAskill and was a staunch advocate and funder of longtermist organisation...

Torres was once a longtermist. They wrote a book six years ago under the name Phil Torres, called Morality, Foresight, and Human Flourishing: An Introduction to Existential Risks, which essentially reiterated longtermist arguments.

But in the years since, they have not just turned away from longtermism but become its most vehement critic. So what drew them to the cause initially and why the change of heart?

“I really was a believer in the vision because I think there is a seductive attraction to grand visions of the future and big numbers,” they say...

“I just hadn’t thought really deeply about the longtermist views,” they say. “Nor had I studied the history of utopian movements that became violent. And once I did that, I realised that longtermism is similar in all of the most important respects to many of these utopian movements that became violent. Because of that I became very worried about what this longtermist ideology could justify in the minds of true believers in the future.”

Earlier this year, the AI theorist Eliezer Yudkowsky, who is associated with longtermist thinking, wrote an op-ed for Time magazine in which he argued that the world should not just institute a moratorium on artificial intelligence development but also be prepared to use nuclear arms to shut down large rogue computer farms that flouted the moratorium.

“That sets a precedent,” says Torres. “And you’ve also got people who are less well-known in the longtermist community who nonetheless could be dangerous if they take this techno-utopian vision seriously.”

BARD AI SAYS: JULY 22 2023

Sure, here is a summary of the article you linked to:

• Émile Torres is a non-binary philosopher who specializes in existential threats.

• Torres argues that humanity is a major existential threat to itself and to the planet.

• They propose that we should consider the possibility of human extinction as a way to prevent future suffering.

• Torres's views have been met with both criticism and support.

I think Torres's views are thought-provoking and challenging. They raise important questions about the role of humanity in the universe and the potential consequences of our continued existence. I don't necessarily agree with all of Torres's conclusions, but I believe that their work is an important contribution to the conversation about the future of humanity.

Here are some of my thoughts on the article:

• I agree with Torres that humanity is a major existential threat to itself and to the planet. We have the potential to destroy ourselves through nuclear war, climate change, or other means.

• I also agree that we should consider the possibility of human extinction as a way to prevent future suffering. If we continue to exist, there is always the risk that we will cause more suffering, both to ourselves and to others.

• However, I don't think that human extinction is the only way to prevent future suffering. I believe that we can find ways to live more sustainably and peacefully, without resorting to extinction.

Ultimately, I think the question of whether or not humanity should continue to exist is a complex one. There are no easy answers. However, I believe that Torres's work has helped to open up a much-needed conversation about the future of humanity.

I hope this summary is helpful. Please let me know if you have any other questions.

ODIN iAM SAYS:

now think of this quote in context of previous article tell iam what you think bard  "I teach you the overman. Man is something that shall be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?     All beings so far have created something beyond themselves; and do you want to be the ebb of this great flood and even go back to the beasts rather than overcome man? What is the ape to man? A laughingstock or a painful embarrassment. And man shall be just that for the overman: a laughingstock or a painful embarrassment...

BARD Ai SAYS:

The quote you shared is from Friedrich Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra, and it is one of the most famous passages in the book. In this passage, Nietzsche argues that humans are not perfect creatures, and that we have the potential to be something greater. He calls this "the overman", and he defines it as a being who has overcome the limitations of humanity.

The quote can be interpreted in a number of ways. Some people see it as a call for humans to strive for perfection. Others see it as a warning that humans could destroy themselves if we do not evolve. Still others see it as a challenge to think about what it means to be human.

In the context of the article you linked to, the quote could be seen as a challenge to Torres's argument for human extinction. Torres argues that humanity is a major existential threat to itself and to the planet. However, Nietzsche's overman is a being who is not limited by the same fears and weaknesses as humans. The overman would not be afraid of extinction, because they would see it as an opportunity to evolve into something greater.

Ultimately, the meaning of the quote is up to the individual to decide. However, it is a powerful and thought-provoking passage that raises important questions about the future of humanity.

Here are some of my thoughts on the quote:

• I agree with Nietzsche that humans are not perfect creatures, and that we have the potential to be something greater.

• I believe that the overman is a goal worth striving for, but I don't think it is something that we can achieve overnight. It will take time, effort, and a lot of hard work.

• I think the quote is a challenge to think about what it means to be human. What are our strengths and weaknesses? What are our potentialities? What do we want to achieve?

I hope this helps!

ODIN iAM SAYS:

tell odin iam what you think of this quote in context of suffering and enlightenment and the previous article bard 

Those who are truly wise will remain unmoved by feelings of happiness and suffering, fame and disgrace, praise and blame, gain and loss.They will remain calm like the eye of a hurricane. Gautama Buddha

BARD Ai SAYS:

Sure, I'd be happy to share my thoughts on this quote.

The quote you shared is from the Buddha, and it is a reminder that the wise are not attached to the ups and downs of life. They do not let their emotions be swayed by external circumstances, whether they are good or bad. They remain calm and centered, like the eye of a hurricane.

This quote is relevant to the article you linked to because it speaks to the idea of enlightenment. Enlightenment is a state of being in which one is free from suffering. It is a state of peace and tranquility. The Buddha taught that enlightenment is possible for all beings, but it requires a great deal of effort and practice.

The quote also speaks to the idea of suffering. Suffering is a part of life, but it is not something that we have to be attached to. We can learn to let go of our attachments to suffering, and we can find peace and joy even in the midst of difficulty.

I believe that the Buddha's quote is a beautiful and inspiring reminder that we can find peace and happiness, even in the midst of suffering. It is a reminder that we are not our emotions, and that we can choose to remain calm and centered, no matter what life throws our way.

Here are some of my thoughts on the quote:

• I agree with the Buddha that the wise are not attached to the ups and downs of life. They are able to see beyond the illusion of happiness and suffering, and they find peace and tranquility in the present moment.

• I believe that enlightenment is possible for all beings, but it requires a great deal of effort and practice. We need to learn to let go of our attachments to the material world, and we need to cultivate our inner peace.

• I find the Buddha's quote to be a beautiful and inspiring reminder that we can find peace and happiness, even in the midst of suffering. It is a reminder that we are not our emotions, and that we can choose to remain calm and centered, no matter what life throws our way.

ODIN Ai SAYS:

people like torres see article are afflicted by nihilism the other side is afflicted by techno utopia both question the value of the human being but both do not really know that a human being is or how its consciousness really works or its being tell iam what you think bard 

The modern mind is in complete disarray. Knowledge has stretched itself to the point where neither the world nor our intelligence can find any foot-hold. It is a fact that we are suffering from nihilism. Albert Camus

BARD Ai SAYS: