TL;DR:
I believe the idea that one physical body equals one person is flawed. In the first place, it is impossible to define a universal “one person” beyond the context. The meaning and definition of “one person” in the context of basic income, voting systems, and social media are different.
- For example, it is understandable that traditional national systems assume one physical body as “one person” due to the current situation.
- However, it doesn’t sit well with proposals for new systems that are bound by the assumption of one physical body as “one person.”
- Examples: WorldCoin/World ID, Decartography, ひとり1ID
- When we try to articulate the discomfort, it seems to stem from the constraint of equating “one physical Homo sapiens body” with “one personality/human rights” based on the physical world.
- I thought it was unsatisfactory to be bound by these physical world constraints.
- I Want to Explore Things that Can Only Be Done in the Information World
- Additionally, there are various new things that cannot be explained by conventional models.
- from /sgg-fairy/ひとり1ID
-
What about people with dissociative identity disorder?
-
What about people pretending to have dissociative identity disorder?
-
What about animals other than humans that have evolved to have intelligence comparable to humans?
-
What about highly advanced artificial intelligence?
-
What about (former) extraterrestrial beings who have immigrated to Earth?
- These are excellent questions (blu3mo).
- It’s also possible to consider things like My Multiple Personalities.
-
- from /sgg-fairy/ひとり1ID
- I want us to think of a better definition of “one person” by considering the diverse meanings it can have, rather than hastily equating one physical body with one person using World ID or similar approaches.
- For example, when considering a majority voting system, “one person” could mean “advocates of opinions that should be equally respected.”
- For example, when considering social media, “one person” could mean “someone with a single, long life story/memory/context.”
- For example, when considering Basic Income, “one person” could mean “something that should survive and incur the same costs (such as food expenses).”
- It seems problematic to equate one physical body with one person without considering these diverse meanings.
- +100 (u7693)(u7693)(u7693)(u7693)(u7693)
There are people who use multiple personas to such an extent that it feels like there are multiple individuals. (rickshinmi)
from Decartography, 2022/11
- Regarding the ideological aspect, there are still doubts about whether ひとり1ID really has meaning (u7693).
- +1 (blu3mo)
- I don’t like the idea of prioritizing the physical body/consciousness (blu3mo).
- That’s a great point (u7693).
- /sgg-fairy/ひとり1ID (u7693)
- I’m curious (if there’s no problem, I’d like an invite to Scrapbox) (blu3mo).
- I sent it to your Twitter DM (u7693).
- I don’t like the idea of prioritizing the physical body/consciousness (blu3mo).
- +1 (blu3mo)
- It’s easy to understand and it’s good, right? (tkgshn)
- Response 1: Now that distinguishing between humans and AI has become difficult, it’s not necessarily easy to understand (blu3mo).
- Response 2: Those who are not satisfied with the current situation where the physical body and personality tend to correspond one-to-one may not agree with “it’s good” (blu3mo).
- I think it’s a point that can’t be dismissed with just “it’s easy to understand and it’s good” (blu3mo)(blu3mo).
1 (tkgshn)&(blu3mo)
