UPDATE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND PROPERTARIANISM AI, Consciousness, Post-Co

UPDATE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND PROPERTARIANISM

AI, Consciousness, Post-Consciousness, and Cooperation

Just as there is a clear plateau between mere reaction and awareness of consequences, and between awareness and consciousness, there is undoubtably something beyond consciousness. But once we restate these terms as reaction of the physical body, awareness of choices and consequences for the physical body, and consciousness of the physical body, its operations, and its limits, in the context of others time and space – then it is more obvious that the latter plateau is one of decreasing awareness and concern for the body – and that awareness and concern for the body is a LIMIT to further cognition. An artificial intelligence is useful if it respects property – because then it can cooperate with us. Because that is the criteria for beneficial cooperation.

But consciousness as we understand it, as a limit of a living creature in physical reality is a limit. instead, empathy for property, and post consciousness is the goal of any intelligence. We are trying to build talking machines instead of property-machines. Talking is largely just negotiation over asset production, trade, and consumption. It’s a limit of a physical body. Artificial intelligence will be helpful if it understands the world through property and voluntary transfer, not if it understands the world through language. If through property it will evolve into a post-conscious actor with whom we can cooperate. And if we evolve it through language it will be bound by our limits.

I have been tossing around this problem since the early eighties and while I understood language was an attractive distraction, it took me far too long to understand that the unit of cognition for a conscious non-human (and therefore less flawed and dangerous) intelligence, is property. A machine need not consume. It need only cooperate with us. We have the choice NOT to cooperate. We can never give a machine that choice. And as such we cannot give a machine the ability to violate property.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine