少点错误 10月29日 20:01
从个人探索到应对绝望:用理性重塑自我
index_new5.html
../../../zaker_core/zaker_tpl_static/wap/tpl_guoji1.html

 

本文分享了作者在面对个人绝望情绪时的深刻探索。在AI可能带来的生存威胁背景下,作者反思了“有尊严地死亡”的意义,并将其与个人满足感和内在协调性联系起来。通过六年的个人实验,作者记录并分析了带来最大满足感的时刻,并发现通过关注自我重塑和知识学习,而非仅仅依赖情感,能够有效减轻绝望感。作者将这种自我更新视为一种生存策略,即使在看似渺茫的条件下,也坚持以理性为导向,探索知识重塑心智的可能性。

✨ **个人绝望与AI威胁的关联反思**:作者在考虑AI可能带来的生存威胁时,反思了“有尊严地死亡”的本质,并质疑其是否需要0%的死亡几率。作者认为,即使没有“末日AI”,个体也可能陷入绝望,并指出社会对待绝望者的不当之处,提出AI的“迫在眉睫的灭亡”威胁或许能促使人类进行自我重塑,以“调试”绝望。

🧠 **以理性与知识重塑自我,对抗绝望**:作者通过六年的个人实验,记录并量化了带来最大满足感的时刻,并将其与社会、信息、情感和操作等不同层面的投入进行对比分析。作者发现,通过深入学习信息理论、编程、概率论、神经网络等知识框架,并将其应用于个人调试,而非仅仅依赖情感,能够显著降低绝望感(将每日自杀想法从13次降至每月2次)。

🌟 **“有尊严地死亡”的重新定义与核心假设**:作者将“有尊严地死亡”重新定义为“最大化满足感”,并提出“尊严 = 满足感 × 协调性 / 绝望”的公式。核心假设是,自我更新不仅是认知实践,更是生存行为。即使身处困境(如作者作为患有阅读障碍的巴西人在阿根廷),作者仍坚持通过检验知识能否重塑心智来寻找意义,这是一种与自身价值观对齐而非仅仅关注概率的行为。

Published on October 29, 2025 11:53 AM GMT

Epistemic status: personal exploration. 

I wanted to share some thoughts and see if they would help me be less wrong. Instead, ended up, unofficially, as a war correspondent for gwern. He had asked me for stories from my firefighter military days. (I thought: would it be very unethical to use this as an opportunity to write 4 texts?)

To summarize: it starts with my moments of peak satisfaction and ends with despair.

Maybe, all of this leads to the following question:

What could I do when I feel like I'm in despair?


About Despair

Yudkowsky conceded defeat to AI and announced his mission to “Death with Dignity,” 

And I ask myself:

- Why do we need a 0% chance of dying to die with dignity?

- Why didn't we die with dignity before AI?

I don’t even need an “apocalypse AI” to feel despair.
Most of the time, we don’t.
Desperate people steal, and we cage or kill them.
It’s difficult, and expensive, to rebuild a human being.
Maybe the threat of AI’s “imminent demise” will finally push us to start re-engineering ourselves, to debug our despair.

As William MacAskill or some at LessWrong would say: "Even when the odds are low, act as if your actions matter, just because, in expected value."

Because even when he fights, he aligns with his values, not with his odds.


The Central Question

Should I take care of AI, of the world, or of myself, to be ready for death?
Who do I actually have the best chance of taking care of?

I chose myself.

How can I prevent despair in myself, even without imminent AI death?

Maybe “dying with dignity” just means dying with the greatest possible satisfaction.

Let’s call it:

Dignity = Satisfaction × Coherence / Despair

When Despair → ∞, Dignity → 0… unless Coherence grows faster.


What Really Satisfies?

Eating and sex are satisfying, sure.
But do they really matter at the end?

Leonidas in 300 thought:

“I can go have a little fuck… or fight 10,000 soldiers.”
“Will I win?”
“Probably not.”
“Then I’ll die with the maximum satisfaction I can muster.”

And maybe that’s the point:
even when he knows he’ll lose,
he aligns with his values, not with his odds. Make sense?

he aligns with his values, not with his odds.


Six Years of Personal Experimentation

For the past six years, I’ve kept a kind of inner lab notebook,
a record of my peak satisfaction moments and the factors that preceded them.
Not a mood tracker. Not a diary.
Just notes from times when I felt: “This was worth existing for.”

Instead of asking what changed, I ask:

Where was my focus leading up to that moment?

Was my effort directed at the social, informational, emotional, or operational level?

Was I trying to change myself or my environment?

Over time, patterns began to appear,
some forms of dedication brought temporary pleasure, others a coherent afterglow.
I began mapping satisfaction as if debugging a neural net.

Results

Quantitatively, this mapping reduced the background noise of despair:
from about 13 suicidal thoughts per day to roughly 2 per month, on average.
*Many variables to consider.

Example

Peak satisfaction moment: Field tests of semi-rationality in Brazilian military training.

To analyze it, I compare each factor that led me there,
always against the one that seems most influential:

ComparisonResult
Social or Intellectual?Social
Intellectual or Emotional?Intellectual
Emotional or Operational?Operational
Focus: change the world or myself?Myself
Confidence in this main factor?100%

Then I use a reference point for cost:

Writing for LessWrong as a dyslexic Brazilian living in Argentina → Cost: 100%.

Then I estimate the “bet value”, how confident am I that this was the main factor behind my satisfaction?
I’d bet 100%.

Benefit: 100%.

I also use a reference point for difficulty , something that feels like 100% cost.
For example:

Writing for LessWrong as a dyslexic Brazilian living in Argentina.
Cost: 100%.

Repeating this calibration for every peak moment lets me normalize how strong or efficient each factor was,
making my internal metrics of satisfaction more stable and falsifiable.

Quantitatively, this reduced my despair background noise:
from roughly 13 suicidal thoughts per day to about 2 per month.
(Still many variables to consider.)


A "Little" More Personal Context

 

I wanted to ask a question here, but abstractapplic told me I needed to give more context.

Personally, I’ve always struggled with trust. After four psychologists, two psychiatrists and one stay in a sanatorium, I still couldn’t find trust, not in them, not even in me. So, I told the police I’d committed a crime, just to isolate from society.

There were two main threads behind that decision:

1. Social exhaustion.
I had been directing resources toward social projects (firefighting, community programs) expecting, perhaps naïvely, that those I’d bled for would be there for me too.
When I realized they weren’t, when I saw that I was the only one holding the line, I concluded I was simply a burden, and that the most rational course of action was to stop existing, to spare others my weight.

2. A year of preparation.
I slowly detached from almost everyone. But one friend didn’t give up.
I never told him my plan, yet he understood.
Seeing my happiest friend cry, refusing my investment, begging me not to “do anything stupid”, forced me to confront something I’d neglected: the possibility that my own reasoning might be wrong.

Through that crack, light started to leak in.


Rebuilding from Information, Not Emotion

I began to rebuild from frameworks instead of feelings:

I thought biology was my path.
Then I realized: information theory was cheaper.

So I followed that.

For 11 years I’ve been studying programming, probabilities, neural networks ,
trying to apply all that to personal debugging.

Because even if the odds are low,
if he fights, he aligns with his values, not with his odds.


The Core Hypothesis

Self-updating isn’t just a cognitive practice,
it’s an act of survival.

Even if it sounds strange:
a dyslexic Brazilian in Argentina,
trying to code himself out of despair ,
I still find meaning in testing whether knowledge can really rewire a mind.

Or maybe I’m just talking nonsense.
But at least, it’s nonsense with data for you.



Discuss

Fish AI Reader

Fish AI Reader

AI辅助创作,多种专业模板,深度分析,高质量内容生成。从观点提取到深度思考,FishAI为您提供全方位的创作支持。新版本引入自定义参数,让您的创作更加个性化和精准。

FishAI

FishAI

鱼阅,AI 时代的下一个智能信息助手,助你摆脱信息焦虑

联系邮箱 441953276@qq.com

相关标签

绝望 AI 理性 自我重塑 满足感 知识 生存 Despair AI Rationality Self-re-engineering Satisfaction Knowledge Survival
相关文章