I have recently been recruited to serve as "advisor" at the Foundational Reseach Institute (FRI); see their official list of advisors. In their own words, the FRI
- brings together researchers from diverse fields to examine how humanity can best reduce suffering in the future. We draw on insights from artificial intelligence, technology, anthropic reasoning, international relations, sociology, public policy, ethics, animal welfare, and many other disciplines.
- That a universe imbued by human civilization is better than one that is not [...] is a very common assumption in futuristic discussions, but not one that is self-evident. What if such a colonization process would actually constitute a catastrophe of cosmic proportions? Computer scientist and ethicist Brian Tomasik has, in a couple of recent essays The importance of wild-animal suffering and Applied welfare biology and why wild-animal advocates should focus on not spreading nature, highlighted a way in which it could turn into such a catastrophe. In the first of these, he begins with quoting Dawkins (1995):
- The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive; others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear; others are being slowly devoured from within by rasping parasites; thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst and disease. (p 131)