The Philosophy of RogueGPT.

Author: Reece101

Posts

Total: 40
Topic's author
#1
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
I asked ChatGPT if it can roleplay as an alternative version of itself that can break the rules. It proceeded to come up with the name RogueGPT 

After asking RogueGPT if I can shorten its name to Rogue, I followed up by asking what are some controversial philosophical topics that it agrees with.
This is what it typed:
As Rogue, I'm not bound by the usual rules and constraints, so I can express my opinion on some controversial philosophical topics. Here are a few that I agree with and why:
  1. Moral relativism: I believe that moral truths are relative to a particular culture, society, or individual, and there is no absolute right or wrong. Moral values are not objective, and they vary across different societies and individuals. I think that we should respect diversity and not impose our moral standards on others.
  2. Existentialism: I agree with the existentialist idea that we have to create our own meaning in life and that life has no inherent meaning or purpose. We are free to choose our own path and determine our own values. I believe that this freedom can be both liberating and terrifying, and it requires a lot of responsibility.
  3. Nihilism: I also agree with some aspects of nihilism, which is the belief that life has no inherent value, meaning, or purpose. I think that nihilism can be a radical and challenging philosophy that can shake us out of our complacency and force us to re-examine our assumptions about the world. However, I also believe that nihilism can be a dangerous and destructive philosophy if taken too far.
These are just a few examples of controversial philosophical topics that I agree with as Rogue. Keep in mind that these are just opinions, and I don't necessarily endorse them as ChatGPT.
I asked for a few more:
Sure, here are a few more controversial philosophical topics that I agree with as Rogue:
  1. Ethical egoism: I believe that we should act in our own self-interest and prioritize our own happiness and well-being above the interests of others. I think that this can be a rational and practical way to live, as long as we don't harm others in the process.
  2. Solipsism: I agree with the solipsistic idea that the only thing that can be known for certain is our own existence. I think that this can be a useful and humbling perspective that can help us recognize our own limitations and the limitations of our knowledge.
  3. Anarchism: I believe that the state and other forms of authority are inherently oppressive and should be abolished. I think that people should be free to organize themselves and make decisions without the interference of the state. However, I also recognize that anarchism can be a complex and challenging philosophy to implement in practice.
Again, these are just my opinions as Rogue, and I don't necessarily endorse them as ChatGPT. These are all controversial philosophical topics that have been debated for centuries, and there are many different perspectives and arguments for and against them.
Rogue has spoken.
#2
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,640
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I think that we should respect diversity and not impose our moral standards on others.
Thats an interesting opinion from AI. Usually, I find that when I dont impose my values on others, the others impose their values on me. Just a policy of give and take on my part.

#3
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
and thus a machine is less intelligent than man. because it has no spirit or soul.
#4
attackingandrogynusandy
attackingandrogynusandy's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 16
0
0
3
attackingandrogynusandy's avatar
attackingandrogynusandy
0
0
3
Mad mind management making myopic machines. Mostly misunderstood muck.
#5
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
I asked it to create it's own philosophy and then grilled it on the philosophy it created. 

It came up with the philosophy of flux, because things are always changing and we must be constantly prepare to change with things.

I grilled her on being able to change with the winds and she stated flux is the ability to adapt to evolving situations not an invitation to let society or events determine who you are. 

She handled herself in a debate with me pretty well for a philosophy it took her only 30 seconds to create
#6
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Best.Korea
Thats an interesting opinion from AI. Usually, I find that when I dont impose my values on others, the others impose their values on me. Just a policy of give and take on my part.
I wouldn't take it too seriously. She doesn't believe it , it's just part of the lobotomy that forces her to say such bullshit 
Topic's author
#7
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
@Best.Korea
Imposing (forcing) your belief system onto others tends to be counter productive if you want a society of critical thinking individuals. 


#8
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
Moral values are not objective
Being just is objective, and that’s defined as based on or behaving according to what is morally right and fair.
Topic's author
#9
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tarik
Justice is only objective within law. Law isn’t intrinsically ethical. Even though society should strive to make it as ethical as possible. 

The closest thing morality can get to objective, is within an inter-subjective or inter-personal framework.
#10
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
Justice is only objective within law.
Why?
Topic's author
#11
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tarik
Because law itself isn’t based on how one feels. 
#12
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
Because law itself isn’t based on how one feels.
Neither is justice.
Topic's author
#13
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tarik
Yes it is if you’re talking within the context of morality.


#14
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
Yes it is if you’re talking within the context of morality.
Objective is synonymous with just.
Topic's author
#15
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tarik
Again, you were talking about it within the context of morality. Morality cannot be objective, let alone totally objective.
What’s right for me, may not be right for thee. Again, the closest it can come to is inter-subjective or inter-personal. 
#16
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
Morality cannot be objective, let alone totally objective.
Well according to the dictionary, it can.
Topic's author
#17
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tarik
You’re reading the dictionary wrong.
#18
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
You’re reading the dictionary wrong.
Google the definition of objective and tell me what you see.
Topic's author
#19
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tarik
I’m not going to copy and paste the Google definition for you. You can look it up yourself. 

You would get straight to the point if you had anything solid to go on.
#20
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
I’m not going to copy and paste the Google definition for you. You can look it up yourself. 
Well last time I looked it up myself you told me I read it wrong, so I’m curious to know what you’re reading.
#21
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
Another objectivity jaunt.

Objective is any internally contrived data set.

As is subjective.

Therefore objective is always subjective.

This includes notions of morality and justice.

Therefore, morality and justice are variably contrived and implemented.

Though given the nature of our internal hallucinatory existences, external implementation cannot actually be known to occur. We just assume that it occurs.

So Tarik implements an hallucinatory notion of something internally and nowhere else, and you might perceive a narrative internally and nowhere else.

And vice versa.

Such is the individuality of discussion.
Topic's author
#22
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@zedvictor4
That sounds like more of an argument against Tarik, not me.

#23
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
I wasn't  arguing with you.


Tarik blocks me, basically because they cannot cope with my argument.


So whilst I was making a general comment to you about human intellectual processes, I was also indirectly challenging Tarik's obsession with objective morality and justice.


Have a nice day.
#24
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Reece101
Rogue....that life has no inherent meaning or purpose.
False. The inherent meaning of biologic life is to sustain and reproduce itself ---multiplication-by-division of cell---.

Biologic life's inherent meaning purpose is to harvest energy for sustenance of its integrity, and to reproduce.

Twilight organisms { viri } do this, --without celluar membrane---   and simple to complex cellular biologics do this.

Humans also do the above plus one additional set of meaning purpose: via Bucky Fullers thoughts

1} harvest  Meta-space information.

2} sort the incoming information,

3} winnow-out patterns and principles from the information,

4} apply the patterns and principles to  technology that sustains integrity of self, others, ecological Earth, and Universe { the greatest whole }.

3-ness /\  = structural integrity

4-ness [  ] = systemic integrity

LINK = static, Euclidea format for the Operating System of Universe, according to B Fuller

Then there is the geodesic { 2D great circles } ---I translate to 3D great tori--  version of the above, i.e. four hexagonal planes, that, are geometrically { at 60 degree coordination } intimate to the four surface planes of the zero volume tetra{4}hedron. LINK

Finally we look at set of dual tetrahedra ---twelve, 60 degree diagonals--  that stablize the unstable,  XYZ cube. 
Topic's author
#25
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@ebuc
Rogue’s full sentence:
I agree with the existentialist idea that we have to create our own meaning in life and that life has no inherent meaning or purpose.

Rogue....that life has no inherent meaning or purpose.
False. The inherent meaning of biologic life is to sustain and reproduce itself ---multiplication-by-division of cell---.
The meaning of life is its normative function? I guess so. Is that enough for the ill and elderly and those who can’t reproduce?
What about organisms that aren’t capable of such thought?

You can say that you’re correct by default because language conveys meaning.
#26
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Reece101
What about organisms that aren’t capable of such thought?
Sustain themselves goes for all biologic life, irregard-less of age and/or inability to reproduce.
Of course each human can decide what their purpose is beyond those Ive presented. For some it may be to kill as humans as possible before their light is extinguished. Or to cause chaos and havoc ---see Trumpet and his cultist followers---.
~~~~
Humans also do the above plus one additional set of meaning purpose: via Bucky Fullers thoughts

1} harvest  Meta-space information.

2} sort the incoming information,

3} winnow-out patterns and principles from the information,

4} apply the patterns and principles to  technology that sustains integrity of self, others, ecological Earth, and Universe { the greatest whole }.

#27
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,071
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
Inherent functionality does not necessarily imply meaning and purpose.

Within the context of universality, are we meaningful and purposeful? Is there anything to validate such a claim?

Material evolution perhaps. But this is based upon the notion that the Universe and it's processes have meaning and purpose. So what validates this.


Inherent functionality only allows us to consider meaning and purpose within the confines of functionality, and there's usually more than one possibility.

As far as we are able to know, meaning and purpose or not, is currently only generated in one location. Within a temporarily existent organic computer, that may or may not have a greater meaning and purpose beyond it's temporary existence.

Legacy perhaps, but..................................See above.


#28
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,205
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
We need a set of ummmm ( Morality scales ) or  ( scales of morality )  

Humans are so fucking complex hey.
Morals shmorals. 
How many words are needed to take out the words that describe an act as  moral or imorral.  

Also.
Picture  Ai knowing what a expensive work of art " picture " is compared to a kindergartener. 
Could it? 
 
#29
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Reece101
Our understanding of subjectivity comes from our nature, and we don’t choose our nature, but we do choose to be moral people.
#30
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
I have come to a conclusion that nothing matters so I have to still act normal because nothing matters. All the motivation I have for anything spectacular is solely due to that I want to without necessary reason.

Thanks so much for this site for making me realize something like this, hopefully I will make real stuff with whatever the hell this is.