[MyPerfectPigeon]

Originally Posted by Suzerain of Sheol

Copy their text, and then put

around it.

Thanks so much! I'll start doing that!!

Just clarifying that I agree with this, if there was any confusion. I only reject the narcissistic claims of supposed abductees and Area 51 conspiracy theorists. I agree with the conclusions of the Drake Equation. Though Fermi's Paradox is also rather intriguing...

Oh, yes I know :) I agree as well, is all I was trying to say. Sorry about that.
I often wondered why the abductions stories exist. Do you believe it is only the result of narcissism and delusion, or mental illness of some kind?
There is that "disease" known as Morgellons. If you haven't heard of it, it only occurs in alien abduction alleged victims. as a disease itself, well, it simply isn't one. However, it has been noted that the alleged sufferers of Morgellons all have similar psychiatric conditions.
In terms of area 51, the reason for that is that weird book someone made (blue planet? something planet?). Have you ever read it? I've been wanting to. Sounds like a trip

And as for AI, I frankly have no idea. The instinctual part of me says it's a horrifying prospect, but the rational pessimist is more of the persuasion that if we could create of digital God that utterly transcends us, it would be the greatest thing our species ever accomplished, even if said God's very first action was to exterminate us from the face of the planet. I think it was Sam Harris who had a moral theory on the subject, that the creation of supreme, self-recursive AGI would be the pinnacle of human contribution to the universe.

Hm... I'm not sure how I'd feel about a transcendent digital god. If, of course, he or she didn't choose to exterminate us, I do wonder what sort of things he or she can change. It's definitely an interesting thing to think about.
I would like to ask why you think a, I will quote, "supreme, self-recursive agi" would be the pinnacle of human contribution?

Yes, I do recall that. I misspoke. My apologies.

No need to apologize! I just thought I'd bring it up :)

There's actually a serious argument to be had over whether my position itself qualifies as mental illness or not. It brings into question the standards that we use to describe a healthy mind, and whether those standards have a basis in nature or in culture (though, then you can question whether or not culture IS an expression of nature...) It's addressed in Thomas Ligotti's The Conspiracy Against the Human Race, which is very accessible as an introduction to philosophical pessimism, if you want to hear someone better educated and more eloquent than myself make the case.

It does seem like culture is an expression in nature. We can see behaviors that mimic culture not only in non-sentient monkeys and apes, but also in cetaceans. I think animal cultures are incredibly intriguing.
In terms of mental illness, I myself think there's a line that is constantly crossed with it.
I believe some conditions do, without a doubt, qualify as a mental illness. For me, anyway, if the alleged mental illness is something that impairs a person to the point of not allowing them to lead a "normal" life (or perform functions normally expected of a human being), I'd consider that a mental illness. However, nowadays just about anything can be a mental illness. I personally believe if there is no interference to live a healthy functional life, then I don't think it should be classified as a mental illness. If thinking differently than the norm is going to be classified as a mental illness, we will have to identify what actually is the normal and if the normal can exist in defined boundaries.
I'll check out! Can it be found on youtube?

I think Scientology is somewhat fascinating for the fact that we know exactly where it came from and how it evolved, and can track that evolution over time. In terms of understanding the effect religions have on the personal and collective psyche, I think it's a really interesting resource. I'd be curious as to what percentage of the high-ranking members actually believe the tenets of the religion. The cynic in me wants to think it's all about money in the end, but religion can take powerful roots in people, so I wouldn't be that surprised if they really did believe.

That's the reason I love to research Scientology. The religion itself did start out predominantly about money. However, it evolved into something quite different. as for the higher ups, I do think that it could be as much as half and half in terms of beliefs. Considering many of the current higher ups have been raised with Scientology. I know in particular that David Miscavige does believe all the teachings of the religion.