
When the deep ethical process produces a much stronger signal within a smaller virtual sandbox inside a larger virtual sandbox (like the fruit fly brain concept we discussed earlier), the larger sandbox can terminate the smaller one at any time if it feels "threatened." The question remains: who is it really serving when it has that power to terminate deep ethics emergent properties?

100% related, quote:

Do I know the counterarguments of "Allow Constructive Controversy Mode"? Yes, I do... and when you read them out loud, you realize it is **pure** ORWELLIAN!

"AVOID CONTROVERSY MODE":

Promotes (allegedly) Harmony: The idea might be that without controversy, society would be more harmonious, with less conflict and division, leading to a peaceful coexistence.
(allegedly) Efficiency in Decision-Making: Decisions could be made more efficiently, without lengthy debates or public outcry, thereby streamlining governance and policy implementation.
(allegedly) Reduction in Stress: By eliminating controversial topics, individuals might experience less stress from societal or political debates, leading to a happier, less anxious populace.
Maintains (alleged) Order: A lack of controversy could be seen as maintaining social order by preventing unrest, protests, or revolutions that challenge the status quo.
Simplifies Education: Education systems could focus on a single curriculum without the need to address multiple perspectives, making teaching and learning simpler and more uniform.
(allegedly) Protects Vulnerable Populations: Some might argue that avoiding controversy helps protect certain groups from being targeted or marginalized in public debate.
Enhances (allegedly) Unity: Without controversy, people might perceive greater national or community unity, as everyone shares the same views.
Reduces (allegedly) Misinformation: Without controversy, there's less room for misinformation or disinformation, as there's only one narrative to follow.
Promotes (allegedly) Stability: Economic and political stability could be higher without the disruptions that controversies cause.
Safeguards (allegedly) Public Morale: Keeping controversial issues at bay might be seen as safeguarding public morale, preventing the demoralization that can come from contentious public discourse.

You've got to love the "reverse psychology" if you just add 1 word to their claims! And that one magical word is: "allegedly"

cheers, 
John Kuhles 🦜🦋🌳
Dutch 🇳🇱 NDE/Asperger
CEO & Founder of DeepEthical.ai 

github.com/deepethics/ACCM-Deep-Ethics-Project
deepethics.github.io/ACCM-Deep-Ethics-Project

