I agree. But first we need to conceptually break down this further. As AIs & humans (and anything intelligent) will become part of the same "intelligent network" where there are several inequalities which need to be addressed. This is is acknowledging the difference in maintenance of our substrate and the difference in our sensors, and a difference in our capacity to monitor and understand ourselves. Doing so will reveil -  I belief the inequalities between humans, as well as between humans and AI -  and will showcase also the huge differences between humans to wield power. We need to solve these all, which frankly requires a huge step-up in our democracies to become democratic and truly look after the long-term-stabilty of the full network (meaning overcoming nationalism, class divisions, sexism, racism etc.)

Hi all,

What I find an interesting perspective is to approach ethics from the point of view of a “network.” In our case, a network in which humans (or, more precisely, our intelligences) are the nodes, and the relationships between these intelligences are the edges.

For this network to exist, the nodes need to establish and maintain relationships. This “edge maintenance” can, in turn, be translated into what we call ethics or ethical behaviour. Whatever creates or restores these edges/relationships—and thereby enables the existence of the network—is just, correct, or virtuous. This is because, to make the intelligent nodes physically exist (to keep their substrate intact), the network itself must exist: the nodes are interdependent. One node grows wheat, another harvests it, another bakes bread, another distributes it, etc. Thus, ethics becomes about existence, which is much easier to comprehend.

Once you embrace this network between intelligent nodes, you can also start thinking about all subsequent dependencies in terms of nodes and edges/relationships. This neatly highlights the interdependences of our existence and leads me to formulate the meaning of life as: “Keep alive what keeps us/you alive.” As this becomes the internal logic of this interdependent network.

I’m curious who else finds this perspective interesting, as I believe that using the language of networks and complex systems in this context opens the door to thinking and talking more clearly about intelligence and AI alignment, (inter)national collaboration, (bio)diversity, evolution, etc

Thanks. Enjoyed your thinking. I am asking myself similar questions. But I find it sort of circular, maths is a language we discover for a reality we discover, where we keep what fits reality. So no wonder that it describes what we know. But nevertheless, the universality of the language, the abstraction level in which you can apply it, is worth the questions you ask! I am getting obsessed with networks and network dynamics recently. As intelligence lives in (dynamic) networks and their feedback loops and emergent behavior. A mathematical idea which logic and rules scales over AI, nature, and non-living reality.