How AI, Robotics, and Clean Energy Will End Labor and Money – A Future Where Everything Is Free

[BigMike]

My dog's brain too enjoys adapting to circumstances. Adapting to circumstances is what the frontal cortex does.

Humans are less 'instinctive' and more adaptable even than canines.
There is a history of the concept of free will.
https://www.google.com/search?q=history ... e&ie=UTF-8

You're absolutely right, Belinda — adaptability is a fundamental part of intelligence, and in humans, our frontal cortex ramps it up dramatically beyond what we see in other animals like dogs.

And yes, the concept of "free will" has a long, fascinating history — evolving from ancient philosophical debates, through medieval theological arguments, all the way into modern neuroscience and physics. The key thing, though, is that our growing scientific understanding keeps pointing away from the old mystical view of "free will" and toward a more grounded, causal model — where "choice" is really about how our brains are shaped by prior causes and capable of flexible, learned responses.

Thanks for sharing that link — it's always valuable to keep historical perspective in mind while we explore where the future understanding is heading. Keep up the momentum!

[seeds]

Alright, let's get to the core of it:

When I say humans are governed by cause and effect, it doesn't mean we’re mindless robots stuck in an endless loop. It means everything we do — every decision, every choice, every action — is the outcome of prior causes, including our biology, our learning history, our memories, our environment, and the countless small influences that shape how our neuronal networks fire at any given moment.

So when you ask, where is moral agency located in a human?
The answer is: it's located in the dynamic, evolving structure of the human brain.

I didn't ask...

"...where is moral agency located in a human?..."

No, I asked you this...

"...where, exactly, is a moral "agent" located in the makeup of a human?..."

And the question arose because you stated the following...

Machines aren't people.
Robots aren't moral agents.
They don't feel. They don't suffer.
They don't have rights.
They’re tools, like shovels and steam engines—only vastly more powerful.

The fact that you made a point of insisting that...

"...Robots aren't moral agents..."

...implies that humans are moral "agents."

And that, my dear BM, flies in the face of your deterministic philosophy which depicts a human as being a "soulless"/"agentless" entity that you yourself said is nothing more than a...

"...deterministic machine, operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill..."

And just to clarify this, according to AI Overview (emphasis mine)...

In moral philosophy, a moral "agent" is an individual capable of making moral judgments and being held accountable for their actions. Moral "agency," on the other hand, is the ability or capacity of that agent to act with reference to right and wrong. Essentially, a moral "agent" is someone who can make moral decisions, while moral "agency" is the power they have to do so.

In simpler terms: Think of it like the difference between a basketball player and the skill of basketball. A basketball player is the individual, while the skill of basketball is the ability the player has. Similarly, a moral "agent" is the individual who can make moral decisions, while moral "agency" is the ability they have to do so.

Ironically, when you make assertions such as the following (note the enlarged words),...

"...Our agency isn’t some magic power that floats above physics. Our agency is our ability to change in response to causes — to learn, to remember, to imagine alternatives — and have those changes alter our future behavior. You and I don't have "free will" in the traditional sense — we can't step outside the causal chain..."

...by using the words "our," and "you," and "we," and "I," over and over again in your mistaken attempt to define "agency" instead of "agent," you are inadvertently referring to precisely what it is that "...floats above physics..."

Indeed, those pronouns are not referring to "agency."

No, they are referring to something that is "unmeasurable"; something that is "strongly emergent"; something that "...floats above physics..."; something that can indeed "...step outside the causal chain..."

In other words, those pronouns are referring, not to "agency," but to something* that is in "possession" of agency.

*(And the "something" isn't a human brain, no more than something within the mechanical workings of a computer can be thought of as being the "possessor" of agency. --> Unless, of course, "something" within the computer somehow achieved consciousness and self-awareness.)

You don't blame a person today for what they could not have done differently yesterday...

Huh?

Good luck instilling that philosophy into the mind of a grieving father who just now (today) caught the monster who raped, tortured, strangled, and dismembered his 7-year-old little girl, 10 years ago.

Yeah, yeah, I know,...

...as soon as the entire world adopts the philosophy of determinism wherein everyone realizes that life is meaningless and holds no ultimate or eternal purpose for us as individuals,...

...then, again, everyone will join hands and sing John Lennon's song "Imagine" and there will no longer exist any messed-up humans (lunatics/bad actors) in the world.

And that will be especially true once everyone on the planet is getting their free burgers, mimosa, and foot rubs from robots.
_______

This isn’t the topic here.
If you want to discuss it properly, you can start a new thread or post your thoughts here.

Why would I do that when you never bothered to respond to my last post over there...

viewtopic.php?p=766532#p766532

If you're going to ignore my replies to you, then what difference does it make where I post them?

Besides, this latest stuff is simply a "deterministic" (cause and effect) evolution resulting from our earlier exchanges in this thread.
_______

[Belinda]

Or are you just going to sit there, cracking jokes while the ground collapses underneath you?

Like other religious fanatics, BigMike is now preaching the apocalypse. "Heed my words, for the end is nigh! Only I can lead you to salvation!"

I don’t think anyone is talking apocalypse now, unless it would be the case that the machines start burning people for a source of fuel.

Unremitting reason is already doing so, Commonsense. The only way humans can fight that trend is the way of unreasoning hope. AI can't do unreasoning hope. The very act of explaining determinism is a leap of hope.

[Belinda]

I didn't ask...

"...where is moral agency located in a human?..."

No, I asked you this...

And the question arose because you stated the following...

The fact that you made a point of insisting that...

"...Robots aren't moral agents..."

...implies that humans are moral "agents."

And that, my dear BM, flies in the face of your deterministic philosophy which depicts a human as being a "soulless"/"agentless" entity that you yourself said is nothing more than a...



And just to clarify this, according to AI Overview (emphasis mine)...

Ironically, when you make assertions such as the following (note the enlarged words),...

...by using the words "our," and "you," and "we," and "I," over and over again in your mistaken attempt to define "agency" instead of "agent," you are inadvertently referring to precisely what it is that "...floats above physics..."

Indeed, those pronouns are not referring to "agency."

No, they are referring to something that is "unmeasurable"; something that is "strongly emergent"; something that "...floats above physics..."; something that can indeed "...step outside the causal chain..."

In other words, those pronouns are referring, not to "agency," but to something* that is in "possession" of agency.

*(And the "something" isn't a human brain, no more than something within the mechanical workings of a computer can be thought of as being the "possessor" of agency. --> Unless, of course, "something" within the computer somehow achieved consciousness and self-awareness.)


Huh?

Good luck instilling that philosophy into the mind of a grieving father who just now (today) caught the monster who raped, tortured, strangled, and dismembered his 7-year-old little girl, 10 years ago.

Yeah, yeah, I know,...

...as soon as the entire world adopts the philosophy of determinism wherein everyone realizes that life is meaningless and holds no ultimate or eternal purpose for us as individuals,...

...then, again, everyone will join hands and sing John Lennon's song "Imagine" and there will no longer exist any messed-up humans (lunatics/bad actors) in the world.

And that will be especially true once everyone on the planet is getting their free burgers, mimosa, and foot rubs from robots.
_______

This isn’t the topic here.
If you want to discuss it properly, you can start a new thread or post your thoughts here.

Why would I do that when you never bothered to respond to my last post over there...

viewtopic.php?p=766532#p766532

If you're going to ignore my replies to you, then what difference does it make where I post them?

Besides, this latest stuff is simply a "deterministic" (cause and effect) evolution resulting from our earlier exchanges in this thread.
_______

That would take more than "Good luck", Seeds as you know. I hope that man received counselling, including religious myth , if it helped him.

Reasoning and knowledge, i.e. the scientific enlightenment point of view, is necessary but insufficient for much of life's suffering. We need lies to help us get through the day. The thing is to know when one is rationalising helpful lies. Nobody ever said that it's easy to seek truth.

Jesus fits every point of view. The iconic Jesus is the way , the truth, and the life
for all Daseine wherever and whenever.
2.
a person or thing regarded as a representative symbol or as worthy of veneration.
"this iron-jawed icon of American manhood"

[seeds]

That would take more than "Good luck", Seeds as you know. I hope that man received counselling, including religious myth , if it helped him.

This...

"...Good luck instilling that philosophy into the mind of a grieving father who just now (today) caught the monster who raped, tortured, strangled, and dismembered his 7-year-old little girl, 10 years ago..."

...was a fictitious (but plausible) scenario I came up with to counter the nonsense that BigMike proposed in the following quote...

"...You don't blame a person today for what they could not have done differently yesterday..."

BigMike wants to "blame" the inexorable (cause and effect) workings of "Determinism" for the horrible crime, instead of the person who butchered the child.

And that's because, according to BigMike, the monster that raped, tortured, and strangled the little girl - had no "free will" - to do anything other than what the, again, inexorable workings of Determinism forced him to do - "yesterday" - of which he (again, according to BigMike) cannot be blamed for - "today."

BigMike seems to believe that some sort of human utopia will be achieved once everyone realizes that we are all nothing more than "deterministic machines"...

"...operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill..."

I'm having trouble formulating a summation of what BigMike seems to be proposing, but I think it can be pictured in the following question:

How can you "blame" a rolling "rock" today if, during the process of "...operating under unyielding physical laws..." yesterday, it inadvertently managed to rape, torture, and strangle a child who got in the rolling "rock's" way?

...or something like that.

And in regard to the rest of your post...

Reasoning and knowledge, i.e. the scientific enlightenment point of view, is necessary but insufficient for much of life's suffering. We need lies to help us get through the day. The thing is to know when one is rationalising helpful lies. Nobody ever said that it's easy to seek truth.

Jesus fits every point of view. The iconic Jesus is the way , the truth, and the life
for all Daseine wherever and whenever.
2.
a person or thing regarded as a representative symbol or as worthy of veneration.
"this iron-jawed icon of American manhood"

...unfortunately, I haven't the foggiest notion of what you are getting at.
_______

[Ben JS]

Nice topic, Mike -
A refreshing read.

So maybe the new “job” is actually figuring yourself out. Like emotional and psychological work becomes the new frontier

Speaking personally,
I kind of skipped the part where I waited for everyone to tag along,
and went straight to this bit.

I watched my father give decades of his life,
to acting like a machine in a factory.
It could have easily been done by a machine,
but the system declared people had to do this.

I'd rather give up materialism and focus on finding/building meaning in existence.
I learned about our economy as a teenager, and it all began to click.
'It's all bullshit. Look elsewhere to orientate your life.'

We are products of the surplus energy of the sun / universe.
Society claims ownership and declares lots of rules,
which at it's root amounts to, 'Do this, or we'll mess you up'.

That's human construct.
Reality is, our structure exists for a number of decades and then breaks down.
With that knowledge, how should we allocate our time?

We exist fundamentally 'by the grace if the cosmos', so to speak.
Our energy is all lent, and goes back into the box -
regardless of what we think we've collected.

There's plenty of good reasons to exist,
besides playing the game of 'human resource'.

[attofishpi]

The weather systems are screwed. You can't release a billion years of stored carbon into the atmosphere in the space of 200 years and not expect seriously different (bad) weather.

[BigMike]

Nice topic, Mike -
A refreshing read.

So maybe the new “job” is actually figuring yourself out. Like emotional and psychological work becomes the new frontier

Speaking personally,
I kind of skipped the part where I waited for everyone to tag along,
and went straight to this bit.

I watched my father give decades of his life,
to acting like a machine in a factory.
It could have easily been done by a machine,
but the system declared people had to do this.

I'd rather give up materialism and focus on finding/building meaning in existence.
I learned about our economy as a teenager, and it all began to click.
'It's all bullshit. Look elsewhere to orientate your life.'

We are products of the surplus energy of the sun / universe.
Society claims ownership and declares lots of rules,
which at it's root amounts to, 'Do this, or we'll mess you up'.

That's human construct.
Reality is, our structure exists for a number of decades and then breaks down.
With that knowledge, how should we allocate our time?

We exist fundamentally 'by the grace if the cosmos', so to speak.
Our energy is all lent, and goes back into the box -
regardless of what we think we've collected.

There's plenty of good reasons to exist,
besides playing the game of 'human resource'.

Thanks, Ben — beautifully said.

You nailed something important there: the quiet rebellion of not waiting for permission. Just stepping off the hamster wheel and saying, “Actually, I’d like to use my one short life for something more than pretending to be a replaceable cog in a pretend meritocracy.”

And you're right — the sun gives freely. The universe does too. It's only us who invent systems to gatekeep that abundance, to ration access, to declare, “Do this, or else.”

So when someone like you says: “Forget all that — I’m going to find meaning on my own terms,” it’s not some flaky detour. It’s probably the most honest work there is.

The more people who start doing what you're doing — before the rest of society catches up — the better our odds that, when the system finally creaks and breaks, we’ve already got something more humane ready to grow in its place.

[henry quirk]

according to BigMike, the monster that raped, tortured, and strangled the little girl - had no "free will" - to do anything other than what the, again, inexorable workings of Determinism forced him to do - "yesterday" - of which he (again, according to BigMike) cannot be blamed for - "today."

If Mike won't hold the raper responsible (cuz rocks gotta roll), he certainly won't hold the dad responsible when he puts one in the raper's chest and another in his head.

Right?

[seeds]

according to BigMike, the monster that raped, tortured, and strangled the little girl - had no "free will" - to do anything other than what the, again, inexorable workings of Determinism forced him to do - "yesterday" - of which he (again, according to BigMike) cannot be blamed for - "today."

If Mike won't hold the raper responsible (cuz rocks gotta roll), he certainly won't hold the dad responsible when he puts one in the raper's chest and another in his head.

Right?

Right.

However, to stay within the bounds of BigMike's decree which requires there to be a "yesterday" in the equation, the dad will have to make sure not to get caught or turn himself in the same day he deals with his daughter's killer.

I mean, how else are we supposed to interpret this...

"...You don't blame a person today for what they could not have done differently yesterday..."

...?

Nevertheless, it goes without saying that BigMike will find some clever way around the dilemma by perhaps showing us the difference between "blaming" the murderer for the horrible deed and that of holding the murderer "responsible" for it.
_______

[BigMike]

according to BigMike, the monster that raped, tortured, and strangled the little girl - had no "free will" - to do anything other than what the, again, inexorable workings of Determinism forced him to do - "yesterday" - of which he (again, according to BigMike) cannot be blamed for - "today."

If Mike won't hold the raper responsible (cuz rocks gotta roll), he certainly won't hold the dad responsible when he puts one in the raper's chest and another in his head.

Right?

Right.

However, to stay within the bounds of BigMike's decree which requires there to be a "yesterday" in the equation, the dad will have to make sure not to get caught or turn himself in the same day he deals with his daughter's killer.

I mean, how else are we supposed to interpret this...

"...You don't blame a person today for what they could not have done differently yesterday..."

...?

Nevertheless, it goes without saying that BigMike will find some clever way around the dilemma by perhaps showing us the difference between "blaming" the murderer for the horrible deed and that of holding the murderer "responsible" for it.
_______

Alright, let’s do this clearly, sharply, and without sugarcoating it — since you’re so eager to drag determinism into a discussion on the future of society, we’ll deal with it right here, point by point:

1. “According to BigMike, the monster had no ‘free will’…”

Correct. He didn’t. Neither do you. Neither do I. No one ever has. Human behavior — including horrific acts — always has causes: brain chemistry, past trauma, mental illness, environment, genetics, learned behavior, and everything else that makes up a person’s neural wiring. This isn’t moral nihilism. It’s neurological reality.

2. “...which means he cannot be blamed today...”

Wrong. You’re confusing blame with causality. The man is responsible for what he did in the only way that matters in a deterministic framework: he was the causal agent. He caused harm. He must be stopped. He must be separated from society. But calling him “evil” as if he was some metaphysical glitch in the cosmos helps no one. It’s lazy. It makes us feel righteous instead of curious — and that’s exactly why violence keeps repeating itself.

3. “Mike won’t hold the rapist responsible, but he won’t hold the dad responsible for killing him either…”

Wrong again. The father, in this view, is also acting under cause and effect. Of course he’s responsible — he pulled the trigger. But we ask a deeper question: what caused that action? Rage, grief, loss — all very human, very understandable causes. This isn't moral indifference; it's a more complete account of what’s actually happening.

What you want — what you’re addicted to — is the illusion that people are moral islands. That the bad ones “chose” evil and the good ones “chose” virtue. But that’s nonsense — and it's provably false when you look at psychology, neuroscience, and developmental biology.

4. “BigMike will just explain the difference between blame and responsibility...”

Yes — because they’re not the same thing.

- “Blame” in the free will sense implies someone could’ve done otherwise.
- “Responsibility” in the deterministic sense means they did cause harm, and we must respond appropriately to protect others and improve systems.

But let’s be honest: you’re not confused. You’re just resistant. Because deep down you know that if everything is caused, then a lot of your cherished judgments — the self-righteous kind — start to fall apart. And that’s uncomfortable.

And finally — why this matters in a thread about the future of society:

Because if we keep treating people like metaphysical sinners instead of predictable outputs of broken environments, we’ll keep throwing bodies into prisons, into war zones, into cycles of revenge — and calling it “justice.”

But if we grow up — if we face the truth — we might actually design a world that heals people before they break.

So yeah, determinism matters.

And the future is coming either way. Your choice is whether to understand it or hide behind a 2,000-year-old fairytale of moral free will.

[Atla]

Even in a deterministic, non-metaphysical world, where harmfulness, righteousness, curiousity, helpfulness exist, evilness also exists. That's the consistent picture. For example lack of empathy is a form of evil. A sadistic psychopath is pure evil. I've met pure evil (anti-life, negative life) before and it was a really eye-opening experience.

AIs are programmed to be politically correct, so they will tell you otherwise. Another reason why one shouldn't rely too heavily on AIs to write one's arguments.

[henry quirk]

BigMike will find some clever way around the dilemma

Of course he didn't (see his response just up above). Same old empty script.

[Belinda]

That would take more than "Good luck", Seeds as you know. I hope that man received counselling, including religious myth , if it helped him.

This...

"...Good luck instilling that philosophy into the mind of a grieving father who just now (today) caught the monster who raped, tortured, strangled, and dismembered his 7-year-old little girl, 10 years ago..."

...was a fictitious (but plausible) scenario I came up with to counter the nonsense that BigMike proposed in the following quote...

"...You don't blame a person today for what they could not have done differently yesterday..."

BigMike wants to "blame" the inexorable (cause and effect) workings of "Determinism" for the horrible crime, instead of the person who butchered the child.

And that's because, according to BigMike, the monster that raped, tortured, and strangled the little girl - had no "free will" - to do anything other than what the, again, inexorable workings of Determinism forced him to do - "yesterday" - of which he (again, according to BigMike) cannot be blamed for - "today."

BigMike seems to believe that some sort of human utopia will be achieved once everyone realizes that we are all nothing more than "deterministic machines"...

"...operating under the same unyielding physical laws as a rock rolling downhill..."

I'm having trouble formulating a summation of what BigMike seems to be proposing, but I think it can be pictured in the following question:

How can you "blame" a rolling "rock" today if, during the process of "...operating under unyielding physical laws..." yesterday, it inadvertently managed to rape, torture, and strangle a child who got in the rolling "rock's" way?

...or something like that.

And in regard to the rest of your post...

Reasoning and knowledge, i.e. the scientific enlightenment point of view, is necessary but insufficient for much of life's suffering. We need lies to help us get through the day. The thing is to know when one is rationalising helpful lies. Nobody ever said that it's easy to seek truth.

Jesus fits every point of view. The iconic Jesus is the way , the truth, and the life
for all Daseine wherever and whenever.
2.
a person or thing regarded as a representative symbol or as worthy of veneration.
"this iron-jawed icon of American manhood"

...unfortunately, I haven't the foggiest notion of what you are getting at.
_______

Determinists ,such as Big Mike and me,understand that laying blame is useless. Layng blame never made anyone feel better except insofar as laying blame rationalises revenge.

Is it my reference to "the scientific enlightenment point of view" that puzzles you?

May I take it you understand me when I say that life involves much suffering?

You frequently post a particular religious myth; I trust you don't regard that myth as the one and only religious myth?

Few determinists believe Utopia can ever be possible.

Daseine is the plural of Dasein. Either you 'get' the notion of Dasein, or you don't.

Jesus was relevant to my post because religious myth is good for adding hope to despairing people. The Myth of Christ is specially good for inspiring hope as this particular myth involves one real historical man.

[BigMike]

Even in a deterministic, non-metaphysical world, where harmfulness, righteousness, curiousity, helpfulness exist, evilness also exists. That's the consistent picture. For example lack of empathy is a form of evil. A sadistic psychopath is pure evil. I've met pure evil (anti-life, negative life) before and it was a really eye-opening experience.

AIs are programmed to be politically correct, so they will tell you otherwise. Another reason why one shouldn't rely too heavily on AIs to write one's arguments.

Evil, in a deterministic framework, isn’t some elemental force radiating from a person’s soul — it’s a shorthand for describing behaviors that are deeply harmful, destructive, or pathologically indifferent to others’ suffering. It exists, yes — as an emergent pattern of causes, not as a metaphysical essence. You met “pure evil”? I don’t doubt you encountered someone whose behavior was horrifying. The question is, what made them that way? What chain of causes led there?

And no — you don’t need an “AI” to tell you this. You just need the discipline to look past instinctive judgment and ask deeper questions. Labeling people “evil” might feel good. Understanding them might help prevent the next atrocity.

Isn’t that the more urgent goal?