Versión en español

This is a list of situations, projects or initiatives in which there could be an “astronomical” (huge) reduction in the amount of suffering compared to what currently exists or is expected. Many of these situations (but not necessarily all of them) involve a high risk in the sense that they are difficult projects whose probability of success is very low. In some cases, this may happen because they are projects that assume as certain some hypotheses for which there is little evidence, so we can consider them unlikely, although not impossible.

I insist that the only criterion to appear on this list is that the project or idea supposes an astronomical reduction of the suffering that we believe exists or will exist. The list can include both remote possibilities and speculative approaches as well as conventional and highly probable scenarios.

That the effect of our actions in the present, on the planet Earth (XXth and XIth centuries) has enormous consequences in the future due to the fact that we are living at a turning point in relation to the exponential increase of technological capabilities and the expansion of sentient life through the galaxy [1]. That we develop a technology that allows us to eliminate suffering, such as those proposed by David Pearce related to genetics and neuroscience (actually, I think this is an option within the previous point) [2]. That we discover some mechanism to act reducing the suffering in the multiverse (in other universes); or in our universe, but thanks to the multiverse [3]. That there is some kind of multilevel reality, like the argument of the simulation and that we can act on that higher level [4]. That digital sentience is a reality (suffering in software, suffering subroutines, reinforcement learning suffering), and we can somehow prevent this suffering (and in a way very related to the first point of this list) [5]. That there is some kind of suffering in physics, like that atoms feel (suffer) and that in turn, we can somehow reduce their suffering [6]. That there is some kind of Sentience Platonism and that in turn, we can in some way act on that Platonic world eliminating suffering, perhaps instantaneously, forever and even maybe including the suffering of the past [7]. That we discover that intense suffering does not exist or at least does not exist for a multitude of cases in which we believed that there existed, for example, the suffering of insects, non human animals, or machines [8]. That we discover that intense suffering is not so relevant and/or that it can be compensated with great amounts of pleasure and satisfaction [9]. That we discover some mechanism to act reducing the suffering of the past [10].

Reducing the suffering of the past is a little less implausible that it sounds. Under Eternalism, past experiencies are as real as present experiences. The bad news is that under this approach, past suffering experiences are real, like if they were happening now. The good news is that if they are real, we can act on them.

More ideas:

References

[1] Reducing Risks of Astronomical Suffering: A Neglected Priority

S-risks: Why they are the worst existential risks, and how to prevent them (EAG Boston 2017)

s-risks.org

[2] The Hedonistic Imperative

[3] Commenting on MSR, Part 1: Multiverse-wide cooperation in a nutshell

[4] Simulation hypothesis

[5] What Are Suffering Subroutines?, Why Digital Sentience Is Relevant To Animal Activists, Petrl, Ethical Issues in Artificial Reinforcement Learning

[6] Related: Is There Suffering in Fundamental Physics?

[7] Implications of a plausible Sentience Platonism in the prevention of suffering

[8] “B3” option at “A map of metaphysical theories of sentience”

[9] NU vs CU debates in EA

[10] Perhaps changing the ‘ontological status’ of past suffering from ‘actually happened in real life’ to ‘happened in a dream’ or even to ‘that never happened’. For instance: Eternalism and Sentience Platonism. Related: Some black holes erase your past. Thanks T Theodorus Ibrahim.

Thanks

David Pearce, T Theodorus Ibrahim, Alex Nil, Jonathan Leighton.

Post and thread at “The Hedonistic Imperative” Facebook group.