And then there was none

 

When he was asked what ultimately brought him into the realms of science, Dr. Möbius answered without any hesitation:

”The will to reduce the suffering in the universe!”.

To describe Dr. Möbius from an outside perspective was hard. Despite being a decent conversational partner, everything in regards to him was shrouded in mystery. With every interview, more questions arose than answered, perfectly in sync to the art of science itself.

So it came that little was known about him, despite being regarded as one of the most important scientists of all times.

Much like Grigori Perelman, he preferred solitude for most of the time.

In stark contrast to him however, he never seemed to shy away from the public in any way. Being far from arrogant and witty in humor, he fit into almost every group easily and never ever was regarded as a Fremdkörper by anyone.

During his post-doc he even married his now-wife Sarah and although they never had kids of their own, they adopted two orphans.

His coworkers were glad to work with such a brilliant mind and great ambassador for the scientific community and so his rare outbreaks of gnarliness and cynicism were tolerated without anyone bearing grudges.

Despite being a physicist, he was able to solve one of the most difficult “New Millennium Fields” questions in mathematics. This led many to declare him as the new Einstein, a notion he deeply refused. For him it was merely a necessity to find the missing puzzle piece to continue his work. 

As a result he didn’t even pay attention to the direct implications his findings had to the scientific community.

The public interest surrounding the award ceremony of the “New Millennium Fields” committee managed to awaken a deep disappointment in him.

In his words, those prices put too much focus on well established scientists and draw too much money and attention to the older generation, when the younger generations would profit much more from these resources.

It was this dissatisfaction that was assumed to be the reason why he did not bother to explain his results in more detail to his colleagues around the world.

As one of the scientist noted in a pop-science paper:

“The more basic concepts of his ideas seem to be bulletproof and at least a few people understand what is going on in his work but where it gets complicated, it feels like a mind from another dimension trying to present its latest results. Dr. Möbius' refusal to explain his paper makes it almost impossible to put it into actual use.”.

Nevertheless he was granted more than enough money from eccentric entrepreneurs, when he announced that theoretically his findings should allow for a device to be built that could change the world.

Or as he put it:

“Nothing less than the most drastic reduction of suffering in the Universe!”.

Now, 42 months later, he was able to present his machine to the public.

Not much was known on the exact purpose of his invention but it was speculated that he was able to harness energy off quantum mechanical effects.

At least, this seemed the most realistic scenario according to the leading scientists.

After thanking his funders, his family and the attendees in a short but enjoyable talk, Dr. Möbius was about to show his device to the audience.

A small table on rolls covered in white sheets was brought onto the stage. On it, a black button mounted to a yellow cubic casing of 4 inch in length and width.

Skeptic whispering escaped the audience after realizing the measurements of his “world-changing” invention, as was proclaimed.

Pinheadsilence filled the room along with doubt, doubt whether the well renowned scientist had suddenly lost his mind.

With a loud and prosperous voice, Dr. Möbius cut through the crowd:

“What you witness here, is the usage of the most important machine ever created!

Not only to sentient life, but the Universe itself!

By pressing this little button, I will be able to solve all problems existing today and every problem that could arise in the future!”

Raising his index finger to the sky and letting it dive down like a missile finding its target, he pushed the button.

And then there was n-

On antinatalism: Antinatalism is compatible with a lifeless and a lively world

Antinatalism, the absence from procreation is often associated with the end goal of a sentient free or even lifeless world.

People like David Benatar argue, that creating life in the first place is ethically wrong. As such, the end result of this philosophy would be an earth without any (sentient) life on it.

Recently though, the amount of people not willing to have children is growing (https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-49298720).

Driven by considerations about climate change and resource consumption more and more young people question procreation.

Those mostly younger generations argue, that adding more humans onto this planet increase overall suffering and will worsen current developments such as climate change and/or the ongoing great extinction event, that kills whole species with each passing day.

Interestingly, the end goal of David Benatar would be worldwide extinction of any sentience and possibly any life, while the other group wants to preserve life -but int the end both rely on the means of antinatalism.

 

Or in short: antinatalism is compatible with saving/preserving life as well as ending it in order to spare sentient beings of suffering. At least as a means of reaching their eventual end goals.

Some Art: Immersion 1

Normally art does not require its artist to explain it. But where a classic gallery or no general background is given, any available information helps the visitor to form a better picture.

Altough the visitor should not feel limited to the presented details on the following work, it maybe helps to find a potential pathway to it.

Of course I encourage everyone to take other paths to it as well.

This small gallery is an exercise in minimalism dealing with antinatalism, efilism, VHEMT, atheism and transhumanism + some bits of dark humour and some exploration into the fields of reductionism.

 a_day_without

 a_start

 barbwire_and_minecraft

 brick_lard

 city_in_moonlight

 doggo

 fallin

 gary

 i_am_the_hammer

 its_never_aliens

 pavement_1

 pavement_2

 perfect_place

 playing_god

skull

the_lord

 usa

 withered_rose

 yarn

 self_portrait

*All art displayed here is licensed under CC0.

Just a thought: On negative utilitarianism and the benevolent world-exploder

Classic Utilitarianism tries to maximize overall joy in the world.

Semi-contrary negative utilitarianism aims for minimizing overall suffering.

In its ultimate conclusion negative utilitarianism ends up humanely destroying all (sentient) life in the Universe, because then there is no more suffering and no more potential for anything to suffer.

This concept is called the “benevolent world-exploder” or sometimes just the “red button”.

While a somewhat bleak outlook, some thought had been invested into this idea as this concept is often discussed among antinatalists and EFILists.

One of the areas of interest is, how much suffering is acceptable for the ones dying by the life ending event in the process of ending all suffering once and for all.

In the best case scenario this process is instantaneous.

To put it more scientific, the world-exploder needs to be a bubble expanding with the speed of light and without ever stopping.

Only then it can be assured nobody suffers by this very process, as the ultimate speed limit of perception (and all information) and therefore pain, is ultimately the speed of light.

Meaning nobody could even see the all destroying bubble nor feel any pain or hardship by it.

It would be the most humane way to put life to sleep, as everything would be dead before it could perceive it in any way.