No kidding. I mean she loses no analogical "rigor" by asking if going back in time and auto-enslaving yourself would make one immoral. That kind of "challenge" showed up all the time on various philosophy groups decades ago on USENET. Just read the FAQ, hon. I'm sure Google's archived it somewhere. IOW, boring, move on citizen
I love that when you browse Aella’s site, she makes it seem like
she’s compelled and committed to doing hard, but necessary, research by
asking important questions and conducting serious analysis on the
data.
Then you go on her Twitter and see that this is what she’s
actually talking about lol
The point? Prob that she and the people around her are such freethinkers they leave no stone unturned in their heterodox research. Important questions like what if racism/sexism/pedophilia/fascism/etc was good.
No need to explore the more extreme ideas on the left, everybody knows communism killed billions and is anti free speech and science.
it's such a multifaceted question that it's impossible to extract any data from it.
is it about the morality of making yourself suffer because the only victim is yourself? or is it about consensual pedophilia? should I factor in that if i time-travel there and back again, then I don't actually have to suffer the effects of my actions until years later?
Time machines are actually impossible. All of the past, or at least the matter that was around yesterday, is in fact here today. The amount of energy required to do something about that is more than what exists.
I don't quite get why anyone ever acts like time is a place.
Naive presentism has some philosophical problems because of Relativity, though: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/123h618/why_is_the_btheory_of_time_so_popular/
I'd tend to agree except that that rests on our current understanding of physics... which *cannot* be entirely correct because of certain predictions of general relativity and quantum mechanics that contradict each other, and because of the need to use renormalization, dark matter, and dark energy to make the math work out.
I too would be extremely shocked if a violation of causality was shown to be possible in both principle and practice. I'd have to revise a huge chunk of my most basic assumptions, and it would take very firm evidence and very elegant mathematics to convince me.
They'd say you seem like you don't understand the concept of a thought experiment, and they'd be correct.
I got asked a thought experiment involving time machines as part of my university admissions interview. If I'd said uh actually they're counterfactual and probably not possible I'd have been laughed out of the interview.
Thought experiments exist within the context in which they are proposed, and the context of a university admissions interview means you should take it seriously.
However, the context for this one is the latest in a long line of twitter poll that try really hard to get respondents to justify child SA, and therefore the best response is both to point it out for what it is and mockery.
You put it more succinctly than I could. u/HowlingFailHole rightly points out that it would be naive to dismiss thought experiments when considering questions about physics. Thought experiments about time machines are useful tools for exploring complex questions like those about causality, locality, and hypothetical mathematical constructs such as closed timelike curves. Anecdotes of history's most brilliant physicists routinely includes counterfactual thought experiments, like Einstein's "what if the speed of light was like 30mph".
Aella's question is not about closed timelike curves. It is about ethics. In her thought experiment, she implicitly presupposes many physical assumptions that would be impossible according to widely-accepted views in physics. She does not explore these questions at all. Instead, she uses the time machine to ponder an ethical question, which is not within the domain of science and definitely not within the domain of physics.
Furthermore, although thought experiments like that might have some productive value to philosophers, as metaphors for more abstract ideas that are difficult to articulate clearly in direct terms, it isn't at all clear that she's using her "thought experiment" as a metaphor for *anything*; either she's hoping to use it to make a (clearly faulty) analogy to the broader issue of the meaning of consent, or she is just literally exploring a fantasy for its own sake, kind of like someone who has just taken a fat bong rip and said "dude what if dogs could talk to people. wouldn't that be sick".
I love how Kyle Hailey takes the sci-fi-ass prompt (“would you commit
an act of pedophilia against your younger self?”) and turns into an
argument for fucking pederasty (“it would be totally cool if society had
an official system of pedophilia”)
Her constant obsession with pedophilia is certainly alarming.
There’s “high decoupling” and then there’s the Super Saiyan decoupling of “What if I could fuck my younger self?”
Guy drinking their own piss: “So do you think molesting a child is wrong?”
I don’t know how she can complain people think she’s a pedo when she’s constantly asking shit like this. Like, you keep bringing it up dude.
Ma’am this is a Wendy’s
I love that when you browse Aella’s site, she makes it seem like she’s compelled and committed to doing hard, but necessary, research by asking important questions and conducting serious analysis on the data.
Then you go on her Twitter and see that this is what she’s actually talking about lol
It would have been so much easier for the both of them to just not post.
Clearly this is just data science.
Next week she will post ‘do you consider your children to be little versions of yourself’
To finish out the ‘planning to have a kid with Yud’ trilogy. ;).
Yes, this is super normal stuff from Aella.
Hey what the fuck did I just read?
What is the point they’re even trying to make? Pedophilia is ok if the child/victim is ok with it, because it’s yourself you’re doing it to?
Insane
Who the fuck starts a conversation like that
She knows her market.
the actual actual rational answer (not “rational” in the Yudkowsyist sense):
“Time machines are counterfactual and probably impossible and thus it is not necessary to consider this question.”
I wonder what they’d say to that
she has 100 interchange words for rape under her sleeve it would be endearing if it wasn’t just telling
I love how Kyle Hailey takes the sci-fi-ass prompt (“would you commit an act of pedophilia against your younger self?”) and turns into an argument for fucking pederasty (“it would be totally cool if society had an official system of pedophilia”)
The grand diddler paradox
Well, time travel doesn’t exist but the world is made of pudding so I guess we all have a pudding fucker paraphilia.