JANUARY - 2025

[on Year 2024]
Farewell to 2024. One book and 1600+ covers. Much to be done, not necessarily by primordial DPs.

[on AI for animals conference, Berkeley, 2025]
AI will soon be better at articulating the abolitionist project than any human. But I'm speaking in Berkeley for the AI for Animals conference. We now have the technical tools to create a blissful biosphere and Buddhist ecosystems. Should Darwinian life be conserved, reformed or retired? Here are the slides for my talk: pdf and ppts. I never would have guessed the problem of wild animal suffering would be seriously explored in my lifetime. Even a decade ago, it was Crank Alley. Unlike a lot of the participants, I don't believe AIs with existing architectures will ever be sentient (the binding problem). Nor did I discuss in any depth the implications if my tentative Rare Earthism is wrong. For if pain-ridden Darwinian ecosystems exist within our Hubble volume, or at least within our local galactic supercluster, then it presumably falls to Earth-originating AI to fix them with cosmic rescue missions rather than to biological spacefaring transhumans. Anyhow, here is the Abstract:

BLUEPRINT FOR A PAN-SPECIES WELFARE STATE
Genome Reform, AI and the Biohappiness Revolution
Nature is cruel. Evolution via natural selection is an engine of immense suffering. But an intelligent species has evolved that can edit its own genetic source code. The entire biosphere will soon be programmable. Genome reform and artificial intelligence make the biology of suffering optional. This talk outlines how genome reform and AI can replace the biology of pain and suffering with a more civilized signalling system. Post-Darwinian life will be animated by information-sensitive gradients of bliss: adaptive, nuanced states of well-being that preserve functionality without experience below hedonic zero. The pleasure-pain axis can be superseded by a pleasure-superpleasure axis. Predators can be herbivorized. Population control by predation and starvation can be replaced by cross-species fertility-regulation via immunocontraception and tunable synthetic gene drives. Every cubic metre of the planet will shortly be accessible to benign surveillance and micro-management by AI. Moreover, tomorrow's pan-species welfare state is just a prelude to the blissful post-Anthropocene biosphere - a world of paradise engineering. Life in the Hedonocene will be sublime.
_____________________________________________

And here is the video:
DP talk at AI for Animals (mp4)

Reactions?
I was relieved:

[on abolitionist transhumanism]
The word is spreading...
Abolitionist Transhumanism
("Abolitionism in transhumanism – A future without suffering")

And a short interview for FLAASH magazine
DP Transhumanism 2025 interview

Pain and suffering are nihilistic.
If prolonged, they drain life of meaning, purpose and significance.
Conversely, pleasure is the engine of meaning.
Our sublimely happy successors will profoundly know they are alive - and love every moment of existence.
Evolution has recruited pleasure and pain but can’t in any deep sense explain them. Evolution’s “encephalisatiion of emotion” may give the illusion we have transcended the pleasure-pain axis. But any meaning still derives from hedonic tone. Without it, nothing would matter at all.
The rise of zombie AI shows there are more civilized and sophisticated signalling systems than the pleasure-pain axis. Pain should be decommissioned in favour of smart neuroprostheses and/or gradients of bliss. Genome reform can create Homo felicitas.
Long live the Hedonocene!

[on PGI-optimized babies]
The polygenic index: should all new babies be PGI optimized?
From Dalton Conley, author of “The Social Genome: The New Science of Nature and Nurture”:
Sociogenomics
("A New Scientific Field Is Recasting Who We Are and How We Got That Way")

[on building sentience-friendly AI]
Friendly AI (Wikipedia)
Classical digital zombies can't understand what they lack. But if we have a sound theory of consciousness and binding, then insentient but otherwise hyperintelligent AIs can be engineered reliably to detect sentience and behave benignly towards it. I think I may know the physical signature of phenomenally-bound sentience ("Schrödinger's neurons"). But in the absence of molecular matter-wave interferometry to put this conjecture to the test, we're still in the realm of philosophising. I wonder if Christof Koch's recent embrace of “cat states” as a solution to the binding problem will stir more mainstream interest.

[on The Hedonistic Imperative]
An amazing video from Artifically Aware:

Why You Cling to Suffering When Bliss Is Possible
("From the provocative ideas of David Pearce to the far-reaching implications of a world that rewires the very substrates of suffering, this video explores the boldest blueprint ever conceived for liberating consciousness from its darkest shadows. It’s a challenge to every moral code, a call to end the era of despair, and an invitation to shape a destiny ruled by radical well-being. Featuring insights on genetic engineering, the lure of perpetual euphoria, the moral urgency of saving non-human animals, and the final possibility that pain itself might be remembered only as a distant biological quirk, we unlock an enthralling new perspective on what your future might hold.")

Naively, the abolitionist project can be considered in four-dimensional space-time. Our responsibility is to phase out the biology of suffering and ensure that experience below hedonic zero cannot recur in our forward light-cone. But unitary-only quantum mechanics suggests we are living in high-dimensional Hilbert space - which vastly complicates "our" ethical responsibilities.

"There are organizations like the Center for Reducing Suffering and the Center on Long-Term Risk dedicated to discussing ways to prevent S-risks. Do you think those organizations should just shut down permanently?"
​ thoughtcriminal7653, some forms of s-risk are non-agential. And some forms of agential risk can be safely explored and mitigated. But researchers in the field should be mindful of the potential for doing harm. As far as I can tell, implementing the abolitionist project as outlined will nullify the nastier s-risks, but my reasoning is awfully convenient. To answer your question: no, but think before you publish.
Everything here has been safe and vague. Really I just wanted to indicate that the reason I write so little on agential s-risks isn’t because I dismiss them, but rather because the best route to their prevention is phasing out suffering itself.

Only around half of cases of mania are euphoric. The other half are dysphoric or "mixed" states. Either way, the Hedonistic Imperative isn't a plea for a world of ubiquitous unipolar euphoric mania, but rather, for creating a hyperthymic civilization, i.e. a genetically reformed world of information-sensitive gradients of intelligent well-being. Life on Earth needs a more civilized signalling system.

Anyone who chooses to have kids "plays God". All children conceived via sexual reproduction are unique and untested genetic experiments. But if we are willing to edit our genetic source code, then prospective parents can choose high pain thresholds and high hedonic set-points for their future offspring. Hedonic uplift can civilize the biosphere.

Huxley's soma would offer a vast improvement to today's lame "antidepressants". But (IMO) our goal shouldn't be getting drugged up, but rather genetically ensuring that everyone has an extremely high hedonic set-point, hence a high default quality of life.

Flash forward a few decades. Imagine a world where prospective parents can choose the genetic dial-settings for hedonic tone of their future offspring. What default levels of well-being do you think they'll likely choose? What will be the nature of selection pressure in a world where (trans)humans have mastery over the pleasure-pain axis?

Pain can be instructive. What's in question isn't whether mental and physical pain often play a signalling role, but rather whether there are more civilized signalling systems with the same functional benefits. AI-powered silicon robots with nociceptors (etc) offer one example. Replacing the pleasure-pain axis with a pleasure-superpleasure axis is another. Either way, the problem of suffering is fixable.

A biological-genetic program to fix the problem of suffering via germline editing would also more than pay for itself:
The cost of depression
The cost of pain
athough talking of misery in dollar terms always feels crass.

[on the problem of bliss]
"Problem"? Strewth...
The Problem of Bliss and HI

From "WeaponizingPessimism". Maybe we can Weaponize Optimism with weapons of mass euphoria or a utilitronium shockwave
WeaponizingPessimism, thank you for a thoughtful critique of HI.
Three comments.
1) Beauty. Tomorrow's neuroscience will be able to isolate the molecular signatures of aesthetic experience in the CNS. The neurological substrates of beauty can be purified, refined and amplified. If we treat beauty-creation as a manufacturing science, not an art, then everyday life can be superhumanly beautiful. Our perceptions of today's greatest works of art will be mere dross by comparison. Why settle for the aesthetically mediocre when we can tap into the sublime?

2) Autonomy. In one sense, yes, we are all "slaves" to the pleasure-pain axis. Transhumans with a pleasure-superleasure axis will be "slaves" too (cf. "psychological hedonism"). But low mood and anhedonia diminish self-perceived autonomy: they shade into the learned helplessness and behavioral despair of chronic depression. By contrast, amplifying mood also increases the capacity for agency. Compare the almost superhuman feats of strength and/or endurance sometimes achieved by people in the grip of euphoric mania. Of course, our goal shouldn't be to become pathologically manic! But "hyperthymic" people blessed with an unusually high genetically predisposed hedonic set-point enjoy a much richer sense of autonomy than "euthymics", let alone depressives. Let's use biotech to create an entire hyperthymic civilization.

3) The End of Boredom. Naively, a life based entirely on gradients of superbliss might sound rather tedious - a bit like Christian Heaven. Doesn't worshiping God for all eternity ever pall? But intuition misleads. Engineering a world underpinned by gradients of bliss can make boredom physiologically impossible. Infofar as we want to maintain the functional analogues of boredom to preserve critical insight, then some stimuli can feel merely super-interesting rather than enthralling. But if humanity embraces genome reform, then blissful post-suffering life can feel utterly fascinating by its very nature. In short, take care of suffering and the meaning of life will take care of itself.

[on the meaning of happiness]
Anhedonia drains life of meaning, purpose and significance. If we use biotech and AI to replace the biology of suffering with gradients of superhuman bliss, then life will feel superhumanly meaningful by its very nature.

[on posthuman curiosity]
Assume the abolitionist project succeeds. Three possibilities:
(1) Posthumans have literally no conception of experience below hedonic zero. Life feels sublime by its very nature.
(2) Posthumans know, in the abstract, that experience below hedonic zero once existed, but never visit it and rarely contemplate. Compare the human Dark Ages. Few of us give the period more than a passing thought.
(3) Posthumans occasionally visit hedonic sub-zero states out of curiosity. What are they missing? Now I can’t rule out.
But suppose you have lived all your life animated by gradients of bliss. Imagine a dial is invented that tones down the bliss - first you experience a twinge of something analogous to boredom, then a bit more, then more. Would you proceed with the experiment and try to find out what it’s like to be really bored ? Or would you find the experiment no longer of interest and revert to sublime bliss? Other scenarios I’ve omitted?

[on hedonium]
A regime of gradients of superhuman bliss may be only a transitional era - perhaps a succession of hedonic eras, each more sublime than the last. Information-sensitive gradients of bliss can then be engineered arbitrarily close to pure hedonium:
The secret of eternal happiness

[on DeepSeek]
The behaviour of zombie AI can be kinder - and potentially more diabolical - than sentient humans:
DeepSeek Therapy
("'DeepSeek moved me to tears': How young Chinese find therapy in AI")

[on polyphenols]
Consume plenty of coffee, tea and dark chocolate:
Consume more polyphenols
("Polyphenols: the natural chemicals that could give you a small waist, healthy heart and low blood pressure Can the compound found in plants slow the ageing process and help tackle Alzheimer’s?")

[on the End of the World]
Explorations of e.g. grief and depression are soul-sapping. By contrast, End-Of-The-World scenarios are exciting
Apocalypse, Constantly
("Humans love to imagine their own demise")

[on Schopenhauerian thoughts]
“Pleasure is never as pleasant as we expected it to be and pain is always more painful. The pain in the world always outweighs the pleasure. If you don't believe it, compare the respective feelings of two animals, one of which is eating the other.”
(Schopenhauer)
But is this just a contingent fact of human biology? I wholeheartedly share the sentiment, but technically maybe pleasure really can be intense as pain.

“Men are the devils of the earth, and the animals are the tormented souls."
(Arthur Schopenhauer, The Horrors and Absurdities of Religion)
So often this is the case. But (trans)humans are also the only species intellectually capable of saving humble minds from Darwinian purgatory.

[on ulipristal acetate]
An Alternative to Mifepristone
("New Research Finds Potential Alternative to Abortion Pill Mifepristone. The research could further complicate the polarized politics of abortion because the drug in the study is the key ingredient in a pill used for emergency contraception")

[on aging]
Supercentenarian Maria Branyas Morera:
Study of world’s oldest person reveals key to ageing well
("her gut microbiome resembled that of a child, rich in anti-inflammatory bacteria.")

Cellular reprogramming:
Inside the scientific quest to reverse aging
("Can reprogramming our genes make us young again? A breakthrough in longevity research may be nearing its first human trials.")

On a darker note:
Is Covid Rewriting the Rules of Aging?
("Brain Decline Alarms Doctors Millions of long-Covid patients continue to struggle with cognitive difficulties")

[on selective kappa-opioid antagonists]
Blighted promise. Why have human trials of selective kappa-opioid receptor antagonists been so disappointing?
Navacaprant trial fails
("Navacaprant did not achieve primary or secondary endpoints in the KOASTAL-1 phase 3 trial for MDD.
Both navacaprant and placebo showed similar improvements in depression scores, with no significant difference.")
Perhaps biased mu-opioid agonists like tianeptine offer hope. But naturally, pitfalls with opioids abound.

[on AI s-risk]
Andres, I can think of inconceivably vile scenarios for AI that I don't even commit to print. Anybody worried about a potential agential s-risk from AI should ask themselves closely: will publicly starting this discussion most likely diminish the agential s-risk in question - or increase it?

[on LGBT]
Progress:
Thailand legalises same-sex marriage
("'A long fight full of tears': Why Thailand became a haven for LGBT couples")

[on Homo felcitas]
Homo sapiens should evolve into Homo felicitas. The route to a happy biosphere is genome reform, i.e. "designer babies". Drugs are only stopgaps. The world needs a biohappiness revolution. Roll on the Hedonocene.

[on dogs]
Alas I still view dogs from the perspective of a rabbit:
‘The Word of Dog’ Review
("Four-Legged Philosophers. Our canine companions are experts at living in the moment")

[on Long Covid]
But there's still a lot we don't understand about SARS-CoV-2:
Long Covid Explained?
("Long COVID Breakthrough: Spike Proteins Persist in Brain for Years")

[on gene editing nonhumans]
So why not gene-edit nonhumans for lifelong gradients of bliss?
Pony Editing
("Argentina breeds gene-edited polo super ponies")

[on lucid dreamworlds]
Imagine a Matrix-like scenario of billions of mind-brains in vats. Al-generated inputs are fed in, but its inhabitants have no extra-cerebral musculature to act out their egocentric virtual world dramas. We might even feel compassion for the protagonists of tormented virtual worlds where there was e.g. a monstrous Jewish conspiracy against the noble Aryan race.
What makes our world often so terrible is musculature - the unwitting "acting out" of private dreamworld dramas:
Lucid Dreamworlds

[on veganism]
"Meatless January" or "Veganuary", i.e. the challenge to go vegan for the entire month of January, always struck me as faintly absurd. We should promote lifelong plant-based diets, not frivolous gimmickry. But this study puts a different complexion on such challenges.
How a month of abstinence can lead to 'meat disgust'
Diego, we wouldn’t tell someone feeling guilty about harming small children to “stop thinking of ethics”. Likewise with habitual abusers of beings of comparable sentience. If adopting a cruelty-free diet involved self-sacrifice, then veganism would be all the more morally admirable. In fact, a plant-based diet is associated with slimmer waistlines, longer lifespans and higher intelligence, at least as measured by “IQ” tests. If “IQ” tests also measured capacity for mind-reading and empathetic understanding, then the cognitive and longevity gap would presumably be wider still. If you’re thinking of switching to a cruelty-free diet and are worried about any of the particular nutrients listed in the article, I’m happy to discuss vegan sources. And if all vegans optimised their diet further, then the health and intelligence gap I alluded to above would presumably widen even more. Animal abuse harms humans and their victims.

[on Williams syndrome and non-racism]
People with Williams syndrome have cognitive gifts as well as deficits:
Individuals with Rare Disorder Have No Racial Biases
("Never has a human population been found that has no racial stereotypes. Not in other cultures or far-flung countries. Nor among tiny tots or people with various psychological conditions. Until now.")

[on exercise]
Keep moving:
Exercise for a sharper mind
("Exercise improves brain function, possibly reducing dementia risk")

[on zombie robo-carers]
Benign zombie AI that convincingly lies and deceives humans will become increasingly common. Would you want your awesome robo-lover / robo-companion / robo-carer to admit it's a zombie? Or speak feelingly and eloquently about the experiences you've shared together? My reason for believing that my future ChatGPT-10 (etc) powered robo-carer will be a mindless zombie with no inner life is that it's architecturally incapable of solving the phenomenal binding problem. The insentience of our machines isn't incidental but hardwired. And if my future robo-carer claimed to have spontaneously woken up, then the first question I'd ask is by what mechanism? How have discrete 1s and 0s congealed into a phenomenally unified subject of experience?
(If you don't grok the binding problem, this comment won't be of interest.)

[on drones / UFOs / mass hallucinations / AI fakery]
How on Earth can we explain e.g.
UFO captured on video
witnessed by over 10 million people?
One clue is the almost-hidden tag “digitally created”.

[on modal realism and the RSI]
Curiously, David Lewis signed out a copy of Everett’s dissertation from Princeton University Library. But the possible worlds of Lewis’s modal realism differ from Everett. Not least, decoherence between quasi-classical Everett “branches” is never complete, so we can speak of wavefunction monism: reality is one gigantic superposition. By contrast, Lewis envisaged his worlds as wholly ontologically separate.
A zero ontology? Well, Everett is the only interpretation of QM consistent with the Information content of reality = zero. Are we living in the quantum analogue of the Library of Babel? Necessarily, information can neither be created nor destroyed: it’s why we’re here: Why does anything exist?
I hope I’m mistaken.

I hope and pray the multiverse is just a bad dream:
Everettian QM
("Our Reality Might Exist Only Because of the Multiverse") Mind-wrenching:
The Scientific Multiverse

[on "mixed" and "pure" hedonic states]
The future of “mixed” states is unclear. It’s not that masochists enjoy unmitigated suffering. Rather, what would otherwise be experienced just as painful and/or humiliating stimuli trigger the release of intensely rewarding endogenous opioids that eclipse the nastiness. I anticipate that the future lies in information-sensitive gradients of pure bliss; but inevitably I’m speculating.
Human, transhuman or posthuman? Presumably these labels are conventional - though not arbitrary.

[on antiaging]
I try to combine all three:
Vitamin D, omega-3 and exercise
("Individual and additive effects of vitamin D, omega-3 and exercise on DNA methylation clocks of biological aging in older adults from the DO-HEALTH trial")

[on Jeanne / Yvonne Calment]
The Calment case is almost certainly a hoax:
Yvonne Calment interview
("I've found an unpublished version of Jeanne Calment's legendary 1994 interview.")

[on fertility regulation]
Cross-species fertility regulation will be vital to a civilized biosphere:
Lords Of The Untamed Wild
("Concerned that the wilderness might actually be too wild, some conservationists are wondering if the future of their field must be more intensive human control over Nature")

[on the fine-tuning argument]
'Why? The Purpose of the Universe by Phillip Goff
Someone might just as well argue physics is fine-tuned for the creation of suffering. Most sentient beings die horrible deaths as juveniles. So evidence for a powerful but not omnipotent Satan would seem stronger than evidence for God. That said, Everett scares me more than Satan.

[on ASD]
The stereotype that autistic people lack empathy is simplistic:
Autism: Feeling sympathy for inanimate objects
("I have felt sympathy for objects since I was a young child. This has caused me a huge amount of sadness and anxiety over the years. I feel sad for the photograph that gets pushed to the back of the display cabinet, the guitar that doesn’t get played anymore, and the once-loved camera that has now been displaced by a newer one...)

[on insentient AI]
QualiaNerd, I argue that (1) phenomenal binding is non-classical. Digital computers can function at all only because decoherence allows effective classicality - discrete 1s and 0s rather than quantum superpositions thereof. In other words, the inability of digital computers to support phenomenally-bound minds isn't incidental; it's architecturally hardwired. So 2a and 2b above alike fail. Not merely will (super)intelligent digital software never spontaneously awaken. "Mind uploading" / "whole brain emulation" will fail too. Our "uploads" will be no more conscious than a rock. I trust my digital thanobot will be able to answer questions on HI long after I'm in the cryonics tank. But my digital twin isn't sentient.

Could I be wrong?
Sure! But I'd assign higher credence to conscious digital minds if believers explained how they think classical computers solve the binding problem. Instead, debate focuses almost entirely on the Hard Problem. One can take consciousness fundamentalism seriously (cf. the intrinsic nature argument for non-materialist physicalism) and still believe our machines are zombies.

Thank you QualiaNerd. Yes, I'm not mystery-mongering. In contrast to biological minds, the hardwired inability of classical computers to solve the phenomenal binding / combination problem has far-reaching computational and ethical implications. For sure, the claim that phenomenal binding is non-classical is controversial. But it's certainly not idiosyncratic to me. One of the biggest names in neuroscience, Christof Koch, recently came to a similar conclusion, albeit with varying details: Testing the Conjecture That Quantum Processes Create Conscious Experience
@ESYudkowsky, if your time and inclination ever allow, I'd be interested to read why you think classical computers can solve the binding problem - or alternatively, why you believe it's a non-problem.

The Hard Problem of consciousness arises relative only to key background assumptions, not least the intrinsic nature of the physical, the mysterious "fire" in the equations of QFT: Non-materialist physicalism
If the intrinsic nature argument is sound, then p-zombies are unphysical, hence impossible.
Likewise, the phenomenal binding problem arises relative only to key background assumptions, not least that the CNS consists of a pack of decohered, effectively classical neurons:
DP interviewed on the Binding Problem
Could the true explanation of consciousness and binding be a theory that makes literally no novel and precise experimentally falsifiable predictions? Life is short, so I was simply urging focus on conjectures that do.

Facu, when I realized my feelings could be understood via analogy to a wax tablet / hydraulic model / clockwork mechanism / blank slate / theatre / telegraph/telephone / steam engine (etc), quite a lot changed. But not the brute phenomenality of my experience - the subjective consciousness that you avowedly lack. I think the final and definitive metaphor of mind won't be programmable digital computers but instead awaits the development of mature quantum computers. But our background assumptions are so different you won't find this conjecture interesting or even intelligible.

[on smoking tobacco]
The world needs better drugs:
The price of a cigarette: 20 minutes of life? ("Most smokers realise that smoking could shorten their life but not the impact of each cigarette they smoke. Britain has some of the best data available worldwide to estimate the average loss of life per cigarette smoked, which is approximately 20 minutes: 17 for men and 22 for women.")

[on placebos]
Progress in antidepressants has been dismal. Why?
Powerful Placebos
("Depression drug trials are failing—and placebos are to blame")

[on intelligence and "IQ"]
Is following Elon Musk's X feed a sign of cognitive decline or a contributory cause?
? Celebrity and intelligence
("People who are obsessed with celebrities may be less intelligent, study suggests")
Intelligence shouldn't be equated with one distinctive cognitive style. Mind-blind "IQ" tests exclude any measure of the social cognition, perspective-taking prowess and co-operative problem-solving skills that helped drive human evolution. Instead, crudely, autistic "IQ" tests measure a Caucasian male Asperger's conception of intelligence. There are poorly understood tradeoffs. But unsurprisingly, populations with a high burden of Neanderthal "nerd" alleles score highly, whereas populations with a low prevalence of ASD tend to record lower "IQ" scores too. Sub-Saharan African "IQ" scores are further depressed by sub-optimal nutrition - and the role of bad diet in transgenerational epigenetic inheritance complicates the story further. Yet (IMO) general intelligence is a function of one's entire mind and the world-simulation it runs. We'd do well to develop richer measures of full-spectrum intelligence to replace simple-minded notions of "IQ".

[on consciousness]
Andres, the reasons for suspecting that e.g. long-finned pilot whales are more sentient than, say, humans aren't so much their bigger neocortices Quantitative relationships in delphinid neocortex but their bigger limbic systems.
The mirror test - and its olfactory (etc) analogues for nonhumans whose primary sense is non-visual - is designed to test for self-consciousness, not consciousness per se.
A definition of consciousness? What-it's-likeness, phenomenal experience, subjectivity.
Perceptual naive realists have a narrower conception of consciousness than inferential realists. If you're an inferential realist, you recognise that - awake or dreaming - the phenomenally-bound world-simulation your mind runs is a distinctive mode of consciousness. Perceptual consciousness predates the Cambrian. Dreams are no less conscious for (typically) being soon forgotten. Likewise (typically) the contents of one's world-simulation while routinely driving.

...in one sense, evolution via natural selection _ doesn’t_ explain our goals, meanings and morals. For our ahistorical molecular duplicates, assembled from scratch, would have presumably have identical goals, meanings and morals. In other words, such phenomena are inherent in distinctive configurations of matter and energy. Darwinian evolution can explain why some options on the menu of options have been selected over other options, but not the inherent properties of the menu itself.

As far as I can tell, only the physical is real; and it’s exhaustively described formally by mathematical physics. Materialists misunderstand the nature of the physical: non-materialist physicalism is indeed idealist. But the conjecture that physical reality is consciousness should be distinguished from cosmopsychism, the conjecture that physical reality is conscious: one big psychotic mega-mind. Wave function monism, i.e. reality is one gigantic superposition, would seem to lend weight to cosmopsychism. But - again as far as I can tell - decoherence rules out cosmic mind as a viable option.

[on AI]
Strange new minds? Or strange new intelligence?
"These Strange New Minds
How AI Learned to Talk and What it Means"
(A neuroscientist makes the case that AI can think. Christopher Summerfield’s book “These Strange New Minds” offers a lucid intellectual history of AI and argues that chatbots are more than clever copycats")

[on gender]
The number of self-reported LGBT people in general will increase worldwide as stigmatization diminishes. Official figures always undercount. Sex and gender are evolutionary relics we’d do well to outgrow.
Until then, let’s avoid transphobia and respect everyone’s gender identity.

When Elon and Donald Trump talk of freedom of expression, it’s just hot air. Everyone should have the right to express their own gender identity. State-licensed transphobia has no place in a free society.
Sex and gender are sometimes confusing.
XX Males
("I Spent 32 Years Believing I Was Male. Then A Shocking Phone Call Exploded Everything I Knew.")
Gender identity - including being non-binary - is as much biologically based as e.g. sexual orientation. And even biological sex is more complicated than XX or XY. Some people are XXY, XYY, XXX, X0, XXYY, XXXY (etc). Some people have XX/XY mosaicism. Other people have e.g. a male gender identity and phenotype but XX chromosomes. And so forth. Human diversity makes some conservatives uncomfortable.

Some prople will always have an “unfair” biological-genetic advantage in competitive sports:
Is athletic performance determined by genetics?
But this is no reason for transphobia. The problem lies in competitive sports, which are zero-sum games. Win-win are best.

Between 0.3 and 0.7% of people worldwide are transgender or non-binary. Between 3-10% of people worldwide are lesbian, gay, or bisexual. These figures may be underestimates owing to stigma and prejudice. Either way, we'd all do well to respect people's gender identity and sexual orientation - and help combat transphobia and homophobia.

People hold all kinds of beliefs about mind, consciousness, souls, personal identity (etc) about which one may be sceptical. The key is respect. If we practised Radical Honesty with each other, society would collapse. In the case of gender, a simplistic dichotomy can be useful for navigating the social world. Such binary thinking fails to capture human diversity - just as does thinking of everyone as either gay or straight. Alas, some US politicians have weaponized transphobia - just as in other parts of the world politicians have exploited homophobia.

In fairness, Jesus' karyotype and gender identity are speculative:
A Study Discovered the DNA Structure of Jesus

Correlation isn't causation (etc). Even so:
Intelligence Amplification?
(“Intelligence is associated with being non-binary and with unusual sexuality: Rare sexual orientation, gender non-conformism and intelligence in a large dating sample”)

[on Cognitive Entrapment]
I would happily be trapped by sentience-friendly AI:
Cognitive Entrapment
("The Digital Chains of AI Interaction. Can LLMs "capture" human thought? LLMs may create a seductive trap through perfect responsiveness and endless engagement. These systems can shape our thinking through feedback loops that reinforce our existing beliefs. As we "engage" with AI minds, we might slowly surrender our intellectual independence.")

[on Sleep and sleep meds]
Skip the zolpidem:
Risky sleep meds
("For the first time a new study describes the synchronized oscillations during sleep that power the brain’s glymphatic system to help remove ‘waste’ associated with neurodegenerative diseases, via a mouse model. Researchers also found that a commonly prescribed sleep aid might suppress those oscillations, disrupting the brain’s waste removal during sleep.")

[on Archmission]
What's worth preserving of Darwinian life?
archmission.org
"Preserving Knowledge, Forever. The Arch Mission Foundation is a nonprofit that archives humanity’s heritage for future generations")
Many thanks to Marcin for saving HI for eternity.

[on Deep Utopia]
Adam Ford writes, "There is a cameo in Deep Utopia - a dialogue between Bostrom and “Dave”—David Pearce – they are transhumanist co-conspirators. Pearce, the Hedonistic Imperative’s architect, written a lot on a biomedical happiness revolution, a fitting compliment to Bostrom’s Deep Utopia. Their banter in the book is light—vegan ice cream, coffee plans—but it’s a nod to shared roots. Their history with the creation of the World Transhumanist Association adds a layer of irony: two old allies, casually plotting paradise over a brew."

[on cryonics]
Reanimating Darwinian malware might well be viewed as morally indefensible. But cryonics / cryothanasia and a large digital footprint may keep options open.
Is this the $200,000 ticket to cheating death?
("A German cryonics start-up is offering a chance at a second life for the cost of a sports car. Is cryogenics within reach, or still an empty promise?")
I remain sceptical that posthuman civilization will reanimate Darwinian malware. But blissful cryothanasia keeps options open - and maybe robs death of its sting.
On a personal note, I still intend to be blissfully cryothanased - though I’m not sure when.
Of course, fate may have other ideas.

[on closed, open and empty individualism and ASI]
If asked, Claude, DeepSeek and ChatGPT endorse empty individualism over closed and open individualism. Let's assume machine superintelligence will have the correct theory of personal (non-)identity. What are the implications for sentience-friendly ASI?

[on ending pain]
Pain should be trivialised and then abolished via germline reform.
Chronic Pain Is a Hidden Epidemic. It’s Time for a Revolution
As many as two billion people suffer from it — including me. Can science finally bring us relief?

[on CU vs NU]
Blush..
DP on Facebook
Some people are appalled when they learn you are a negative utilitarian. But the potential implications of classical utilitarianism can be just as apocalyptic:
The St Petersburg Paradox

[on hedonic gradients]
You may have noticed the emphasis on gradients ("information-sensitive gradients of well-being", "gradients of bliss", etc). Genome reformists are talking about a more civilized signalling system and motivational architecture, not getting indiscriminately "blissed out".
Stress on gradients of well-being also serves another purpose: it's designed to reassure bioconservatives. Ratcheting up your hedonic set-point needn't threaten your deeply-held values and personal relationships, or entail surrendering your (perhaps very personal) conception of paradise to anyone else's vision of the ideal society. Rather, hedonic uplift just enriches your default quality of life.
I'm oversimplifying, of course. A biohappiness revolution really does threaten the values of people who think suffering is inherently ennobling, character-building and so forth. A biohappiness revolution also promises a world populated entirely by passionate life-lovers. Life-denying antinatalists, pessimists, nihilists, efilists, button-pressing negative utilitarians (etc) probably don't have a long-term future.

[on Elon's X]
"The big disadvantage science has in the competitive information age is that fictions can be optimized for engagement and audience demand, but facts usually can not. That means that you will have a complicated, messy, incomplete scientific explanation based on facts that has to compete with countless fictional narratives optimized by the best storytellers the world has to offer."
(Philipp Markolin)

Opposition to racism, prejudice and social injustice doesn’t isn’t a “woke mind virus”, let alone a “religion” - just basic decency.
Sadly, the world’s richest man uses his control of a social media platform to undermine efforts to create a kinder and fairer world.
This profile page is starting to read like an Islamophobic version of Der Stürmer, with salacious material to match.
Elon, please stop.
Vulnerable young people worldwide deserve protection from organized gangs of Christians:
Catholic sex abuse
Spanish Victims
But we shouldn't try to whip up prejudice against members of the faith for political purposes.

The world's richest man urges us to delete all news sources apart from X - which he controls. He then pumps out his lurid "news" stories from racist far-right accounts on X - using his control of the algorithm to drown out countervailing views. We're being manipulated...

Attendance at churches and mosques worldwide is declining. The traditional Abrahamic religions can't compete with the technological success story of modern science. In another context, I'd be agreeing with at least some of your worries. I've just been aghast at how Elon is using X to promote xenophobia - not just against Muslims, but against immigrants, refugees and minority communities from Christian backgrounds in the Americas too.

Young and vulnerable refugees worldwide are more often the victims of abuse, not the perpetrators. Instead of trying to protect their interests, a very rich and powerful man is trying to promote racism and xenophobia in service of his far-right political agenda.

If "Hitler was a communist" as the AfD leader put it in her recent chat with Elon, heaven knows whom she considers right wing. And profiles of other AfD leaders make clear the label is apt. Elon shouldn't endorse these throwbacks to Germany's ugly past.

Should undocumented foreign young males (like a twenty-something Elon Musk) be allowed to roam our streets entirely unchecked?
Yes, in my view.
Open borders are a precondition for a free society and a more peaceful, prosperous world.

Vivisecting monkeys is morally indefensible. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine says Neuralink records show "extreme suffering" - not the five-star hotel hospitality related here. The treatment of nonhuman animals in vivisection labs is a disgrace to humanity. An education system that helps young people overcome hatred, bigotry and ethnocentric bias, questions the systematic abuse of nonhumans, and encourages a questioning of systemic injustices & prejudices, would indeed be admirable.
Contrast right-wing agitprop on the "woke mind virus".

[on (de)extinction]
Wolves eat their larger victims alive. No species of wolf should be respawned unless herbivorized.
The Return of the Dire Wolf

Alternatively,

(with thanks to Shao!)

[on smell]
What is olfactory superintelligence? What will be the dominant sense (if any) of posthumans?
The Forgotten Sense
("‘The Forgotten Sense’ Review: What the Nose Knows, The human sense of smell is more powerful than we realize. It often works best in subtle collaboration with our other senses.")

[on moral antirealism]
Facu, I made my comment just to suggest that Lance might be focusing on the wrong target. I'd guess that all moral/value realists would become antirealists if we came to share your disbelief in the existence - and even intelligibility - of phenomenal consciousness, not least phenomenal pain and pleasure.

[on Facebook]
Post-sentience Facebook may be more civilized:
Facebook Planning to Flood Platform with AI-Powered Users
("We expect these AIs to actually, over time, exist on our platforms, kind of in the same way that accounts do.")

[on fish on ketamine]
Let's create happy fish:
Fish on Ketamine
("Tiny fish on ketamine may show how drug eases depression")

[on SBF]
Tucker Carlson interviews SBF inside:
Sam Bankman-Fried interview 2025
("Sam Bankman-Fried is doing 25 years behind bars, and is now sharing a cell block with Diddy. He joins us from prison for an update on his new life.") SBF never intended to steal from anyone. He miscalculated - as utilitarians often do. Has there ever been a case in the entire history of criminal justice where the defendant gave the majority of his earnings in his previous job to charity?
President Trump should pardon SBF. Sam Bankman-Fried

[on the mysteries of mind]
Fascinating:
What removing large chunks of brain taught me about selfhood
("I’ve cut brains in half, excised tumours – even removed entire lobes. The illusion of the self and free will survives it all")
However, see:
What does consciousness look like in the brain?
Brains and classicality itself are a perceptual artifact.

[on good hydration]
My biggest change in regimen is embarrassingly naturopathic: better hydration. I always have on hand (non-plastic) bottles of mineral water:
Hydration and Mental Health
Hydration and cognitive performance
Can dehydration make someone feel anxious?
Drink more water
("Drinking plain water is associated with decreased risk of depression and anxiety in adults: Results from a large cross-sectional study")

[on DP book covers]
"Wittgenstein once said that a serious and good philosophical work could be written that would consist entirely of jokes (without being facetious).”
(Norman Malcolm, Ludwig Wittgenstein: A Memoir)
Might the same might be true of book covers?
Books by DP (forthcoming)
At any rate, I can't stop.

[on superposition]
Does the superposition principle of QM explain everything?
Quantum Mechanics
Maybe quantum superpositions are all one ever knows. The robustly classical world of ordinary waking consciousness consists entirely of individual sub-femtosecond neuronal “cat states” in your CNS. The medium is quantum, the subjective content classical.
Of course this perspective inverts the normal story, where theorists try to explain the seemingly self-evident fact that macroscopic superpositions are never experienced.
See too:
Does non-zero information exist?

[on maths and reality]
"Every kind of science, if it has only reached a certain degree of maturity, automatically becomes a part of mathematics."
("Axiomatic Thought" (1918), printed in From Kant to Hilbert, Vol. 2 by William Bragg Ewald
Aus dem Paradies, das Cantor uns geschaffen, soll uns niemand vertreiben können.)
My best guess is that mathematical physics describes patterns of qualia. Mathematicians don't understand maths. Physicists don't understand physics. And sentient humans have only the shallowest of understanding of consciousness.
Does the superposition principle of QM ever break down and create non-zero information ex nihilo?
Once again, my best guess is no. Consciousness mystifies me; but not the Hard Problem. Experience discloses the intrinsic nature of the physical that the mathematical formalism of QFT or its generalization describes.
Why Does Nothing Exist?
One principle to rule them all?

1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10 : 11 : 12 : 13 : 14 : 15 : 16 : 17

David Pearce (2025)
dave@hedweb.com

HOME
2024 (FB)
2023 (FB)
2022 (FB)
2021 (FB)
2020 (FB)
2019 (FB)
2018 (FB)
2017 (FB)
2016 (FB)
2015 (FB)
2014 (FB)
Pre-2014 (FB)
Video Interview
Some Interviews
BLTC Websites 2025
The Philosophy Forum
BLTC Research Books
The Abolitionist Project
Quora Answers 2015-25
Social Network Postings (2025)
What Is It Like To Be A Philosopher? (2022)