Opinions from philosophersSee all occupations
R.G. Frey, Philosopher
agrees EuthanasiaEspecially with regard to taking life, slippery slope arguments have long been a feature of the ethical landscape, used to question the moral permissibility of all kinds of acts... The situation is not unlike that of a doomsday cult that predicts time and again the end of the world, only for followers to discover the next day that things are pretty much as they were... We need the evidence that... See More
Russell Brand, British comedian, actor, and author
agrees Legalise recreational drugsNobody at all is helped by drugs being made illegal, unless of course there is a conspiracy to marginalise, condemn and persecute disenfranchised members of our global community. I'd hate to think that was the situation - that certain countries didn't matter, that certain classes didn't matter, that certain races didn't matter. So unless that's the situation, there's literally no reason to p... See More
disagrees State-funded faith schoolsAll education should be secular. But failing that, religious indoctrination - which in a free society will occur, because one cannot outlaw religion itself, though one should argue against it vigorously – should happen at the private expense of those who choose to inflict it on their children. It should emphatically not be happening at public expense.
Noam Chomsky, Linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, historian, social critic, and political activistIt comes from the right wing originally. Milton Friedman proposed it for example. From his point of view it was part of an effort to undermine welfare state measures. But it doesn’t have to have a reactionary component. It can be interpreted as something progressive. That people have rights. In fact if you read the universal declaration of human rights, 1948, take a look at article 45. It says peo... See More
Nassim Nicholas Taleb, Essayist, scholar, statistician, former trader, and risk analystThere are resilient ways to solve problems, say feed the world, without complicated technologies that entail fragility and unkown possibilities.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, AstrophysicistIf all you think about are the jobs today and you project forward, there might be a day where robots take over every single job we have today. Is that the future that will come? No, because we have innovative people – well, I like to think we have innovative people in society – and we invent new things all the time, that require new jobs to manage them, to invent them, to conceive them, to enginee... See More
Before the prospect of an intelligence explosion, we humans are like small children playing with a bomb [...] We have little idea when the detonation will occur, though if we hold the device to our ear we can hear a faint ticking sound
Elizabeth S. Anderson, Philosopher. University of Michigan.
disagrees Basic IncomeVan Parijs would guarantee everyone the maximum unconditional basic income that could be sustained in a society (...) regardless of wether they were able or performing socially useful work. Lazy, able-bodied surfers would be just as entitled to that income as dependent caretakers or the disabled. (...) Van Parij's proposal effectively indulges the tastes of the lazy and irresponsible at the expen... See More
Alan Turing, British mathematician and logician, a major contributor to mathematics, cryptanalysis, and AIEven if we could keep the machines in a subservient position, for instance by turning off the power at strategic moments, we should, as a species, feel greatly humbled. … [T]his new danger … is certainly something which can give us anxiety.
Sam Harris, American author, philosopher, and neuroscientistIt is sobering to admit that chaos seems a probable outcome even in the best-case scenario, in which the AGI remained perfectly obedient. But of course we cannot assume the best-case scenario. In fact, “the control problem”—the solution to which would gu
Toby Ord, Moral philosopher at Oxford University. His work focuses on the big picture questions.His current research is on avoiding the threat of human extinction and thus safeguarding a positive future for humanity... He is a leading expert on the potential threats and opportunities posed by advanced artificial intelligence over the coming decades
Steven Pinker, Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard UniversityThere is not the slightest reason to believe in a coming singularity. The fact that you can visualize a future in your imagination is not evidence that it is likely or even possible. Look at domed cities, jet-pack commuting, underwater cities, mile-high buildings, and nuclear-powered automobiles--all staples of futuristic fantasies when I was a child that have never arrived. Sheer processing power... See More
David Chalmers, Australian National University ProfessorAn intelligence explosion has enormous potential dangers: an end to the human race, an arms race of warring machines, the power to destroy the planet
Douglas Hofstadter, Professor of cognitive science. Pulitzer prize winnerLife and intelligence are far more complex than the current singularitarians seem to believe, so I doubt it will happen in the next couple of centuries
Daniel C. Dennett, Philosopher and Austin B. Fletcher Professor of PhilosophyThe real danger, then, is not machines that are more intelligent than we are usurping our role as captains of our destinies. The real danger is basically clueless machines being cededauthority far beyond their competence.
Richard Jeffrey, Chief Investment Officer, Cazenove Capital Management
agrees BrexitOnce the exit terms had been negotiated [...], the UK could become a more attractive base for foreign companies looking for an European base. One specific of the economy that could benefit would be financial services.
Filter by occupation/university by clicking on the pies: