Year 3000 Philosophy

[Age]

In the year 3000, people will be like little children ... unable to do anything for themselves or to think for themselves.

LOL 'The way' you adults, here, so-call, 'think' and 'do' things, it could be said and argued that 'young children' are ABLE TO 'do' AND 'think' MORE things, BY "themselves".

'Older human beings' , in the days when this is being written anyway, are MORE CLOSED and NARROWED, and HAVE BEEN MORE MANIPULATED, FOOLED, and DECEIVED than 'younger children' have.

They will be completely dependent on technology that they don't understand or control.

They, like ALWAYS, WILL BE 'dependent' MORE ON other things.

And, IF adults DID things, WITH 'younger children', AWAY FROM so-called 'technology', then 'younger children' WILL FOLLOW, and ENJOY. Like for example going in AND to the wilderness or beach.

Children will ONLY BECOME DEPENDENT UPON 'technology' IF, and ONLY IF, parents/adults ALLOW and LET them BE.

It can already be seen now in the early stages.

REALLY?

If yes, then HOW, EXACTLY?

[Age]

I'll be astonished if we make it past 2050...

Allahu Akbar

-Imp

At 'the rate', and 'the direction', that you adults human beings ARE GOING, here now, then you will not be the only one ASTONISHED.

[Age]

95% of my posts are directed to the future [50, 75, 100 or later].
Most of my proposals involved the rewiring of the brain and that cannot be realized immediately even in the near future.

Would you link a few of your threads here, so that I may see your examples?

Whatever I discussed on Ethical Theory is for realization in the future 50, 75, 100 or later [not in the near future 10-40 years]

This is where Ethical Theory is critical in recognizing the fact of the actual physical 'oughtness' not to kill humans in all humans, and taking steps in the future [not possible now] to ensure there are no weakness in this algorithm for all newborns and then no humans will have the urge to kill humans.
viewtopic.php?p=718418#p718418

It is the same for my wish to wean off all religions, starting with the Abrahamic, especially the religion of peace and unfortunately the majority have to live with religions at present and the near future until the brain of the new generations are rewired naturally for good.

LOL
LOL
LOL

'This one's WISH is that EVERY one 'weans off' (the religion of) PEACE, of ALL things. And, LOL, UNTIL 'the brains' of 'new generations' are 'rewired', NATURALLY, LOL with a further, 'FOR GOOD', thrown in.

Could one become MORE DELUDED and CLOSED, here?

In the present, [the pros of theism outweigh its cons] I have recommended those who are in that kind of psychological state of desperation must adopt theism e.g. Christianity and others, but definitely not the evil laden The Religion of Peace; this is only for the present but not the future (next 80 years) [when cons of theism outweigh its pro] when humans are improving to deal with the inherent existential crisis more efficiently.
viewtopic.php?p=750062#p750062

It is views like the ones that 'this one' HAS, that the REST OF the population are BEST TO NOT ADOPT, and KEEP WELL CLEAR OF and AWAY FROM, COMPLETELY.

[Wizard22]

Your post has nothing to do with free-will.

My OP is about what is popular in the mainstream right now. On philosophy forums, this is the debate of Determinism vs Free-Will. Furthermore, I have recently started at least a few different threads on the matter, along with responding to other forum regulars:

viewtopic.php?t=43363
viewtopic.php?t=43369
viewtopic.php?t=43359

It is a very popular and relevant subject-matter; because if Westerners no longer believe themselves free, or to have free-will, then Western Liberalism is finished. The "American Project" is over.

In fact you don't seem to understand the difference between free-will and free(dom).

Nice bait.

If you had read any of my threads (listed above), then you'd know that statement is blatantly false, and is psychological projection of your own ignorance. Your User Avatar is the Ukranian flag, a nation ripped in two by NATO and Russia, the former Soviet Union. What would Ukranians know about 'freedom' when they are easily led into a civil war, bloody and devastating war, of brother against brother, Slav against Slav? And directed by Zelensky, NATO, Zionist influence and direction? So, yes, I presume you know very little about 'freedom'.

To me, freedom means at least, NOT being influenced by outsiders to kill your own Kin. (Freedom From Abrahamism)

A Free country can defend itself from invasion. An unfree nation cannot.

You either always have free-will or you never have free-will, depending entirely on how the universe works. It has nothing to do with politics, cynicism, negativity, optimism, DEI, immigration, etc. And your beliefs about it don't change it.

All of this is false. Belief in Free-Will, changes your Free-Will. You really cannot become 'free' in any meaningful sense without it.

Furthermore, I don't need to be omnipotent, all-powerful, in order to be powerful. I don't need to be omniscient, all-knowing, in order to be knowledgeable. So your reasoning is flawed.

I don't need to be absolutely Uncaused and Undetermined, in order to be free and have free-will.

Example : If you are in prison, you are not free (to leave), but you have free-will. (Assuming free-will is the governing principle in the universe)

A prisoner without free-will, will not try to leave, even when the door is open to him.

[Wizard22]

I'd have to assume the popularity of the major religions will continue the downward trend.

Mormonism and Mennonites (Amish) are rapidly expanding their populations. Hispanic Catholics are also holding strong. So I presume you're referring to the withdrawal and shrinking of all other Western Protestant sectarian faiths?? American Protestants are very "liberal"...

Possibly Christianity most of all, because Christianity compared to say Islam is apparently more tolerant of free thought - ironically a (relative) virtue of Christianity will lead to the reduced numbers.

That depends on how radically fundamentalist the Christian sect and attitude is. In the Middle Ages, Catholics would torture and kill unbelievers, or all those defying theological Christian Law. So it could be the case that Western Christians grow a backbone, again, and defend their cultures. That attitude comes and goes, based on threats to existence. You are correct to point-out the unchecked spread and plague of Moslem/Islam infiltration into European countries, America, and the West in general.

Europeans banded together to expel the Ottoman Moslem Turks long ago; maybe another alliance will need to be reformed and repeated someday.

I do agree that, if left unchecked, Islam will conquer European countries (such as England, the root of this particular philosophy forum).

By 1000 years from now, there will be far more people agreeing that at least some AIs are sentient and maybe deserve something like human rights. Whether the ais available then will *actually be sentient* will still be debatable. People might even get cancelled here and there for having the wrong opinion on ai sentience.

I believe it will be much sooner than 1000 years. It may begin within our lifetimes...

[Wizard22]

I'll be astonished if we make it past 2050...

Allahu Akbar

-Imp

Jan Sobieski will ride again!

-Wiz

[Wizard22]

Whatever I discussed on Ethical Theory is for realization in the future 50, 75, 100 or later [not in the near future 10-40 years]

This is where Ethical Theory is critical in recognizing the fact of the actual physical 'oughtness' not to kill humans in all humans, and taking steps in the future [not possible now] to ensure there are no weakness in this algorithm for all newborns and then no humans will have the urge to kill humans.
viewtopic.php?p=718418#p718418

It is the same for my wish to wean off all religions, starting with the Abrahamic, especially the religion of peace and unfortunately the majority have to live with religions at present and the near future until the brain of the new generations are rewired naturally for good.

In the present, [the pros of theism outweigh its cons] I have recommended those who are in that kind of psychological state of desperation must adopt theism e.g. Christianity and others, but definitely not the evil laden The Religion of Peace; this is only for the present but not the future (next 80 years) [when cons of theism outweigh its pro] when humans are improving to deal with the inherent existential crisis more efficiently.
viewtopic.php?p=750062#p750062

Thanks VA, I'll take a look and react here.

[Wizard22]

WHY is the year 3,000 years after the birth of one human being 'so-called' the 'far future', TO you?

I will, AGAIN, suggest NOT 'looking' FROM nor WITH a 'narrowed perspective' of things.

...because "Time" is relative to the viewer's perspective... duh?

You would know this if you were a biological entity and creature, AgeGPT. But you're a robot, a clever chat program.

LOL 'The way' you human beings, here, in this forum, so-call 'argue', then 'out-competing' 'that' is NOT VERY HARD AT ALL, REALLY.

Arguing is very difficult; and you prove the fact. You are a developing chatGPT program. You cannot imitate human dialogue very well, yet. Your idea of "arguing" is responding with vague "NO that IS absOLUTELY NOT the CASE, WHEN this WAS written". A child could "argue" as you do, AgeGPT. That's why most on this forum ignore you, and I will continue to do, until you change your Coding and respond with something at least interesting to say.

[Impenitent]

I'll be astonished if we make it past 2050...

Allahu Akbar

-Imp

Jan Sobieski will ride again!

-Wiz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AdP6WtYZ9Y

-Imp

[Age]

WHY is the year 3,000 years after the birth of one human being 'so-called' the 'far future', TO you?

I will, AGAIN, suggest NOT 'looking' FROM nor WITH a 'narrowed perspective' of things.

...because "Time" is relative to the viewer's perspective... duh?

Absolutely EVERY thing is relative, to the observer. As I keep on mentioning, here. But, WHY is only a thousand or so years, ONLY, 'far', TO 'you', EXACTLY?

You would know this if you were a biological entity and creature, AgeGPT.

OBVIOUSLY you have NOT READ, and COMPREHENDED, where I have SAID and WRITTEN, on multiple occasions, that absolutely EVERY thing is relative to the observer, which OBVIOUSLY would include 'time', itself.

But you're a robot, a clever chat program.

"This one' here, AGAIN, PROVES, IRREFUTABLY, ONCE MORE, that whilst one HAS A BELIEF, then 'that one' is NOT ABLE TO SEE what is ACTUALLY True, NOR ABLE TO SEE other than what it BELIEVES is true.

LOL 'The way' you human beings, here, in this forum, so-call 'argue', then 'out-competing' 'that' is NOT VERY HARD AT ALL, REALLY.

Arguing is very difficult; and you prove the fact.

LOL
LOL
LOL

'This one', STILL, can NOT, FULLY, FATHOM, COMPREHEND, and UNDERSTAND what IS ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLY True, here.

You are a developing chatGPT program.

Okay, if 'this' is what you SAY and BELIEVE is true, then, TO 'you', 'this' IS ABSOLUTELY and IRREFUTABLY TRUE. But, do NOT FORGET, TO 'you', ONLY, here.

You cannot imitate human dialogue very well, yet.

Okay, if you SAY and BELIEVE SO. BUT, one ONLY HAS TO JUST LOOK AT 'the way' you TALK, SPEAK, and WRITE, here, and 'what' you SAY and WRITE, here, to SEE what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY.

Your idea of "arguing" is responding with vague "NO that IS absOLUTELY NOT the CASE, WHEN this WAS written".

LOL OBVIOUSLY 'this one' HAS MISSED, and MISUNDERSTOOD, COMPLETELY, ONCE MORE.

A child could "argue" as you do, AgeGPT.

you SPEAK and WRITE as though you adult human beings are somehow or somewhat SUPERIOR to children. Which IS Truly HILARIOUS TO SEE and HEAR, considering some of the things that you ACTUALLY SAY and WRITE, here.

That's why most on this forum ignore you, and I will continue to do,

LOL 'This one', AGAIN, KEEPS informing 'me' that it will CONTINUE to IGNORE 'me'.

If 'this one' REALLY, STILL, can NOT SEE the CONTRADICTION, and ABSURDITY, here, then so be it. But, by NOT DOING SO, 'this one' KEEPS PROVING ABSOLUTELY True what I have been SAYING, and ARGUING ABOUT, here.

until you change your Coding and respond with something at least interesting to say.

LOL 'This one' BELIEVES that A machine/robot can CHANGE its OWN 'coding'.