Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Content

We will have a Guru right to reply with Bob VERY SOON.

Any burning questions you might have would be good to hear.

Things we will cover:

- Our episode on Bob

- Consciousness and whether it is mysterious

- Bob's commentary on the Russian invasion and cognitive empathy

Comments

Tim Tripp

Perhaps explore with Bob if he thinks we should strive for peace at any cost, such as allowing Russia to defeat Ukraine. Also ask him if the invasion of Ukraine by Putin's Russia is not an advertisement for smaller more vulnerable countries to acquire nuclear weapons, particularly if we just stand by and wring our hands while the smaller country is destroyed and/or consumed by a larger aggressor?

Kyle Wilson

Ask him why he gives Russia a special status within his cognitive empathy framework? He clearly extends much more empathy in only one direction

SHOUNAK SARKAR

Please ask Bob if he still thinks that Putin's war of aggression in Ukraine was prompted merely by perceived NATO threats rather than Soviet nostalgia and territorial ambitions like establishing direct land access to Crimea? Hasn't this war actually united NATO members more and even made the organisation more attractive? How does Bob process this?

m/z

Look forward to this discussion. Ive been having heated debate with my brother about war in Ukraine since it started. My brother sounds like Bob when it comes to a lot of this stuff. Putins a cold blooded murderer since long before this war. There are many examples of Putins regime murdering dissidents or critics in brutal ways. Poisinimg etc. Dont understand how people dont see that. Does he empathisize with all serial killers? Or just those who run nations?

brianshmrian

This is probably not the most important thing in the world but... I'd like you to ask Bob about his takedown of Nick Bostrom's simulation hypothesis. Bob talked about this in an episode of the Parrot Room and, if I understand him correctly, his problem with Bostrom's argument is that it assumes that base reality is like our reality, and this might not be the case. But it seems to me that if your counterargument is that base reality is _not_ like our reality, then you're already conceding that we're not living in base reality.