Lex Fridman PodcastPeter Singer: Suffering in Humans, Animals, and AI | Lex Fridman Podcast #107
EVERY SPOKEN WORD
105 min read · 21,146 words- 0:00 – 5:25
Introduction
- LFLex Fridman
The following is a conversation with Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton University, best known for his 1975 book, Animal Liberation, that makes an ethical case against eating meat. He has written brilliantly from an ethical perspective on extreme poverty, euthanasia, human genetic selection, sports doping, the sale of kidneys, and generally happiness, including in his books, Ethics In The Real World and The Life You Can Save. He was a key popularizer of the effective altruism movement and is generally considered one of the most influential philosophers in the world. Quick summary of the ads. Two sponsors: Cash App and MasterClass. Please consider supporting the podcast by downloading Cash App and using code LEXPODCAST and signing up at masterclass.com/lex. Click the links, buy the stuff. It really is the best way to support the podcast and the journey I'm on. As you may know, I primarily eat a ketogenic or carnivore diet, which means that most of my diet is made up of meat. I do not hunt the food I eat, though one day I hope to. I love fishing, for example. Uh, fishing and eating the fish I catch has always felt much more honest than, uh, participating in the supply chain of factory farming. From an ethics perspective, this part of my life has always had a cloud over it. It makes me think. I've, uh, tried a few times in my life to reduce the amount of meat I eat. But for some reason, whatever the makeup of m- of my body, whatever the way I practice the dieting I have, I get a lot of, uh, mental and physical energy and performance from eating meat. So, both intellectually and physically, it's a continued journey for me. I return to Peter's work often to reevaluate the ethics of how I live this aspect of my life. Let me also say that you may be a vegan or you may be a meat eater and may be upset by the words I say or Peter says, but I ask for this podcast and other episodes of this podcast that you keep an open mind. I may and probably will talk with people you disagree with. Please try to really listen, especially to people you disagree with, and give me and the world the gift of being a participant in a patient, intelligent, and nuanced discourse. If your instinct and desire is to be a voice of mockery towards those you disagree with, please unsubscribe. My source of joy and inspiration here has been to be a part of a community that thinks deeply and speaks with empathy and compassion. That is what I hope to continue being a part of, and I hope you join as well. If you enjoy this podcast, subscribe on YouTube, review it with five stars on Apple Podcast, follow on Spotify, support on Patreon, or connect with me on Twitter, @LexFriedman. As usual, I'll do a few minutes of ads now and never any ads in the middle that can break the flow of the conversation. This show is presented by Cash App, the number one finance app in the App Store. When you get it, use code LEXPODCAST. Cash App lets you send money to friends, buy Bitcoin, and invest in the stock market with as little as $1. Since Cash App allows you to buy Bitcoin, let me mention that cryptocurrency in the context of the history of money is fascinating. I recommend A Cent of Money as a great book on this history. Debits and credits on ledgers started around 30,000 years ago, the US dollar created over 200 years ago, and the first decentralized cryptocurrency released just over 10 years ago. So, given that history, cryptocurrency is still very much in its early days of development, but it's still aiming to, and just might, redefine the nature of money. So again, if you get Cash App from the App Store or Google Play and use the code LEXPODCAST, you get $10 and Cash App will also donate $10 to FIRST, an organization that is helping to advance robotics and STEM education for young people around the world. This show is sponsored by MasterClass. Sign up at masterclass.com/lex to get a discount and to support this podcast. When I first heard about MasterClass, I thought it was too good to be true. For $180 a year, you get an all-access pass to watch courses from, to list some of my favorites, Chris Hadfield on space exploration, Neil deGrasse Tyson on scientific thinking and communication, Will Wright, creator of SimCity and Sims, on game design. I promise I'll start streaming games at some point soon. Uh, Carlos Santana on guitar, Garry Kasparov on chess, Daniel Negreanu on poker, and many more. Chris Hadfield explaining how rockets work and the experience of being launched into space alone is worth the money. By the way, you can watch it on basically any device. Once again, sign up at masterclass.com/lex to get a discount and to support this podcast. And now, here's my conversation with Peter Singer.
- 5:25 – 9:53
World War II
- LFLex Fridman
When did you first become conscious of the fact that there is much suffering in the world?
- PSPeter Singer
I think I was conscious of the fact that there's a lot of suffering in the world pretty much as, as soon as I was able to understand anything about my family and its background, because, um, I lost three of my four grandparents in the Holocaust. And, uh, obviously I knew why I only had one grandparent, uh, and she herself had been in the camps and survived. So, I think I knew a lot about that pretty early.
- LFLex Fridman
My ent-entire family comes from the Soviet Union. I was born in the Soviet Union. So, sort of, uh, the World War II has deep roots in the culture and the, the, the suffering that the war brought, uh, millions of people who died is in the, is in the music, is in the literatures, in the culture. What do you think was the impact of the war broadly on our society?
- PSPeter Singer
The war had many impacts. Uh, I think one of them, uh, a beneficial impact, is that it showed what racism and, uh, authoritarian government can do. And at least as far as the West was concerned, I think that meant that I grew up in an era in which, uh, there wasn't the kind of overt, uh, racism and anti-Semitism that had existed for my parents in Europe. I was growing up in Australia, um, and certainly that was clearly seen as something completely unacceptable. Uh, there was also, though, a fear of, uh, a further outbreak of war, which this time we expected would be nuclear because of the way the Second World War had ended. So, there was this, uh, overshadowing of my childhood about the possibility that I would not live to grow up and be an adult because of a catastrophic nuclear war. Um, there was a f- the film On The Beach was, uh, made in which the city that I was living, Melbourne, was the last place on earth to have l- living human beings-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... because of the nuclear cloud that was spreading from the north. Um, so that certainly gave us a bit of that, that sense. There were many, you know, there were clearly many other legacies that we, we got of the war as well, and the whole setup of the world and the, the Cold War that followed. Uh, all of that has its roots in, in the Second World War.
- LFLex Fridman
You know, there is much beauty that comes from war, sort of, uh... I, I had a conversation with Eric Weinstein. He said, "Everything is, is great about war except all the death and suffering." Do you think there's something positive that, uh, that came from the war? The, the mirror that it put to our society, sort of the ripple effects on it, ethically speaking, do you think there are positive aspects to war?
- PSPeter Singer
I find it hard to see positive aspects in war, and some of the things that other people think of as, as positive and, and beautiful, I'm maybe questioning. So, there's a certain kind of patriotism. People say, you know, during wartime, we all pull together, we all work together against a common enemy. Uh, and that's true. An outside enemy does unite a country, and in general, it's good for countries to be united and have common purposes. But, um, it also engenders a kind of a nationalism and a patriotism that can't be questioned, uh, and that I'm, I'm more skeptical about.
- LFLex Fridman
What about the, the brotherhood that people talk about from soldiers? The, the sort of counterintuitive sad idea that the closest that people feel to each other is in those moments of suffering, of being at the, sort of the edge of seeing your, uh, comrades dying in your arms. That somehow brings people extremely closer together. Suffering brings people closer together. How do you make sense of that?
- PSPeter Singer
It may bring people close together, but there are other ways of bonding and being close to people, I think, without the suffering and death that war entails.
- LFLex Fridman
Perhaps you could see, you can already hear the romanticized Russian in me. (laughs) We tend to romanticize suffering just a little bit in our literature and, and culture and so on.
- 9:53 – 16:06
Suffering
- LFLex Fridman
Could you take a step back, and I apologize if it's a ridiculous question, but what is suffering? If you would try to define what suffering is, how would you go about it?
- PSPeter Singer
Suffering is a conscious state. Uh, there can be no suffering for a being who is completely unconscious. Uh, and it's distinguished from other conscious states in terms of being one that considered just in itself we would rather be without. Uh, it's a ca- a conscious state that we want to stop if we're experiencing or we want to avoid having again if we've experienced it in the past. Um, and that's, as I say, emphasized for its own sake, because of course people will say, "Well, suffering strengthens the spirit. It has good consequences." Um, and sometimes it does have those consequences, and of course sometimes we might undergo suffering. We set ourselves a challenge to run a marathon or climb a mountain or even just to go to the dentist so that the toothache doesn't get worse, even though we know the dentist is gonna hurt us to some extent. So, I- I'm not saying that we never choose suffering, but I am saying that other things being equal, we would rather not be in that state of consciousness.
- LFLex Fridman
Is the ultimate goal sort of... you have the new 10-year anniversary, uh, release to The Life You Can Save book, really influential book. We'll talk about it a bunch of times throughout this conversation, but do you think it's possible to eradicate suffering, or is that the goal? Or do we want to achieve a, a, a kind of minimum threshold of suffering and then keeping a little drop of poison (laughs) that, uh, to keep things interesting in the world?
- PSPeter Singer
In practice, I don't think we ever will eliminate suffering. So, I think that little drop of poison, as you put it, or if you like the, the contrasting dash of, of an unpleasant color perhaps, something like that, in, in a-... otherwise harmonious and beautiful composition. Um, that is gonna always be there. Uh, if you ask me whether in theory if we could get rid of it, uh, we should, uh, I think the answer is whether in fact we would be better off or whether in terms of by eliminating the suffering, we would also eliminate some of the highs, the positive highs. Um, and if that's so, then we might be prepared to say it's worth having, uh, a minimum of suffering in order to have the best possible experiences as well.
- LFLex Fridman
Is there a relative aspect to suffering? So, when we... When you talk about eradicating poverty in the world, is this the more you succeed, the more the bar of what defines poverty raises? Or is there at the basic human ethical level a bar that's absolute, that once you get above it then, um, it, uh, we can morally converge to feeling like we have eradicated poverty?
- PSPeter Singer
I think they're both. Um, and I think this is true for poverty as well as suffering. There's, uh, an objective level of suffering or of poverty where we're talking about objective indicators like you're constantly hungry. Um, uh, you don't- you can't get enough food. You're constantly cold. Uh, you can't get warm. Uh, you have some physical pains that you're never rid of. Uh, I think those things are objective. But it may also be true that if you do get rid of that and you get to the stage where all of those basic needs have been met, there may still be then new forms of suffering that develop. Um, and perhaps that's what we're seeing in the affluent societies we have, that, uh, people get bored, for example. They don't need to spend so many hours a day earning money to get enough to eat and shelter. So, now they're bored. They lack a sense of purpose. Uh, that can happen, and that then is a kind of a relative suffering, um, that is distinct from the objective forms of suffering.
- LFLex Fridman
But in your focus on eradicating suffering, you don't think about that kind of... The- the kind of interesting challenges and suffering that emerges in affluent societies, that's just not i- in your ethical, philosophical brain is that of interest at all?
- PSPeter Singer
It would be of interest to me if we had eliminated all of the objective forms of suffering, which I think of as, uh, generally more severe and also perhaps easier at this stage anyway to know how to eliminate. So, um, uh, yes, in some future state when we've eliminated those objective forms of suffering, I would be interested in trying to eliminate the relative forms as well.
- LFLex Fridman
Well-
- PSPeter Singer
But that's not a practical need for me at the moment.
- LFLex Fridman
Sorry to linger on it because you kind of said it, but just, uh, is elimination the goal for the affluent societies? So, is there a cr- uh, you know, do you see suffering as a creative force?
- PSPeter Singer
Suffering can be a creative force. Um, I think I'll- I'll... repeating what I said about the highs and whether we need some of the lows to experience the highs.
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah.
- PSPeter Singer
So, it may be that suffering makes us more creative, and we regard that as worthwhile. Um, maybe that- that brings some of those highs with it that we would not have had if we'd had no suffering. Um, I- I don't really know. Many people have suggested that, and I certainly can't... have no basis for denying it. Um, and if it's true, then I would not want to eliminate suffering completely.
- LFLex Fridman
But the focus is on- on the absolute, not to be cold, not to be hungry.
- PSPeter Singer
Yes. That's... At the present stage of where the world's population is, that's- that's the focus.
- LFLex Fridman
Talking about human nature for a second.
- 16:06 – 21:52
Is everyone capable of evil?
- LFLex Fridman
Do you think people are inherently good or do we all have good and evil in us that basically everyone is capable of evil based on the environment?
- PSPeter Singer
Certainly most of us have p- potential for both good and evil. Uh, I'm not prepared to say that everyone is capable of evil. There may be some people who even in the worst of circumstances would not be capable of it. But, uh, most of us are very susceptible to environmental influences. So, when we look at, uh, things that we were talking about previously, let's say the, uh, what the Nazis did during the Holocaust, uh, I think it's quite difficult to say, "I know that I would not have done those things even if I were in the same circumstances as those who did them." Even if let's say I had grown up under the Nazi regime and had been indoctrinated with racist ideas, uh, had also had the- the idea that I must obey orders, follow the commands of the Fuhrer. Um, plus of course perhaps the threat that if I didn't do certain things, I might get sent to the Russian front and that would be a pretty grim fate. Um, I think it's really hard for anybody to say, "Nevertheless, I know I would not have killed those Jews." Or whatever else it was that they...
- LFLex Fridman
Well, what's your intuition? How many people will be able to say that?
- PSPeter Singer
Truly to be able to say it? I think very few. Less than 10%.
- LFLex Fridman
To me it seems a very interesting and powerful thing to meditate on. So, I've read a lot about the war, uh, World War II, and I can't escape the thought that I would've not been one of the 10%.
- PSPeter Singer
Right. Uh, I have to say I simply don't know. Um, I- I would like to hope that I would have been one of the 10%, but I don't really have any basis for claiming that I would've been different from the majority. Um, is it a worthwhile thing to contemplate?It would be interesting if we could find a way of really finding these answers. Um, there obviously is quite a bit of research on people during the Holocaust, on how ordinary Germans got, uh, led to do terrible things, and there's al- there are also studies of the resistance, some, uh, heroic people in the White Rose group, for example, who resisted even though they knew they were likely to die for it. Um, but I don't know whether these studies really can answer your larger question of how many people would have been capable of doing that, uh...
- LFLex Fridman
Well, sort of the reason I think it's interesting is in a world, as you've described, uh, you know, when, when, uh, there are things that you would like to do that are good, that are objectively good, it's useful to think about whether I'm not willing to do something or I don't even ... I'm not willing to acknowledge something as good and the right thing to do because I'm simply scared of, uh, putting my life, uh, of damaging my life in some kind of way. And that kind of thought exercise is helpful to understand what is, what is the right thing in my current skill set and the capacity to do? Sort of there's things that are convenient and there's ... I wonder if there are things that are highly inconvenient, where I would have to experience derision or hatred or, or death or all those kinds of things, but it is truly the right thing to do. And that kind of balance is, uh... I feel like in America, we don't have... It's, it's difficult to think in the current times, it s- seems easier to put yourself back in history where you can sort of objectively contemplate whether... how willing you are to do the right thing when the cost is high.
- PSPeter Singer
True, but I think we do face those challenges today, and I think, uh, we can still ask ourselves those questions. Uh, so one, one stand that I took, um, more than 40 years ago now was to stop eating meat and become a vegetarian at a time when you hardly met anybody who was a vegetarian, or if you did, they might have been a Hindu or they might have had some weird theories about meat and health. Um, and I, I know thinking about making that decision, I, I was convinced that it was the right thing to do, but I still did have to think, "Are all my friends gonna think that I'm a crank, um, because I'm now refusing to eat meat?" Uh, so, you know, I'm not saying there were any terrible sanctions obviously, but I, I, I thought about that and I guess I decided, well, I still think this is the right thing to do, and if... I'll, I'll put up with that if it happens. And one or two friends were clearly uncomfortable with that decision. But, um, you know, that was pretty minor compared to the historical examples that we've been talking about. Um, but other issues that we have around too, like, uh, global poverty and what we ought to be doing about that is, is another question where people, I think, can have, have the opportunity to take a stand on what's the right thing to do now. Climate change would be a third question, where again, people are taking a stand. I... You know, look at Greta Thunberg there and say, "Well, I think it must have taken a lot of courage for a schoolgirl to, to say, 'I'm gonna go on strike about climate change,' and, uh, see what happened."
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah, especially in this divisive world, she gets exceptionally huge amounts of support and hatred both.
- PSPeter Singer
That's right.
- LFLex Fridman
Which is, uh, very difficult for a teenager to operate in.
- 21:52 – 37:22
Can robots suffer?
- LFLex Fridman
In your book, Ethics in the Real World, amazing book. People should check it out. Very easy read. (laughs) 82 brief essays on things that matter. One of the essays asks, "Should robots have rights?" You've written about this, so let me ask, should robots have rights?
- PSPeter Singer
If we ever develop robots capable of consciousness, uh, capable of having their own internal perspective on what's happening to them so that their lives can go well or badly for them, then robots should have rights. Until that happens, they shouldn't. (laughs)
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs) So, is consciousness essentially a prerequisite to suffering? So everything that possesses consciousness is capable of suffering, put another way. And if so, what is consciousness? (laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
I certainly think that, uh, consciousness is a prerequisite for suffering. You can't suffer if you're not conscious. Um, but is it true that every being that is conscious, uh, will suffer or has to be capable of suffering? I suppose you could imagine a kind of consciousness, especially if we can construct it artificially, that's capable of experiencing pleasure, but just automatically cuts out the consciousness when, when there's suffering, sort of like, you know, instant anesthesia as soon as something is gonna cause you suffering. So that's possible, um, but doesn't exist, uh, uh, as far as we know on this planet yet. You asked, "What is consciousness?" Um, philosophers often talk about it as, uh, there being a subject of experiences. So, uh, you and I and everybody listening to this is a subject of experience. There is a conscious subject who is taking things in, responding to it in various ways, feeling good about it, feeling bad about it. Uh, and that's different from the kinds of artificial intelligence we have now. I take out my phone, I ask Google directions to where I'm going, uh, Google gives me the directions, and I choose to take a different way. You know, Google doesn't care. It's not like I'm offending Google or anything like that. There is no subject of experiences there. Uh, and I think that's...... the indication that, uh, Google, the AI we have now, is- is not conscious, or at least that level of AI is not conscious. Um, and that's the way to think about it. Now, it may be difficult to tell, of course, whether a certain AI is or isn't conscious. It may mimic consciousness and we can't tell if it's only mimicking it or if it's the real thing. But that's what we're looking for. Is there a subject of experience, a perspective on the world from which things can go well or badly from that perspective?
- LFLex Fridman
So, our idea of what con- o- o- of what suffering looks like comes from our just watching ourselves, uh, when we're in pain, sort of, um...
- PSPeter Singer
Or when we're experiencing pleasure. It's not only-
- LFLex Fridman
P- pleasure and pain.
- PSPeter Singer
...
- NANarrator
Yes.
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah, so... And then, uh, you could actually, you could push back on this, but I would say that's how we kind of build an intuition about animals is we can infer the similarities between humans and animals and so infer that they're suffering or not based on certain things, and they're conscious or not. So, what if robots... You mentioned Google Maps. And- and I've done this experiment, so I work in robotics, just for- for my own self, for, um... I have several Roomba robots and I play with different speech, uh, interaction, voice-based interaction. And if the Roomba or the robot or Google Maps shows any signs of pain, like screaming or moaning or being displeased by something you've done, that, in my mind, I can't help but immediately upgrade it. And even when I myself programmed it in, just having another entity that's now for the moment disjoined from me showing signs of pain makes me feel like it is conscious. Like, I immediately then, the whatever, the, uh... I immediately realize that it's not, obviously, but that feeling is there. So sort of, I guess, I guess, what do you think about a world where Google Maps and Ro- Roombas are pretending to be conscious and we, descendants of apes, are not smart enough to realize they're not? Or- or whatever. Or that is conscious, they appear to be conscious, and so you then have to give them rights. The reason I'm asking that is that kind of capability may be closer than- than we realize.
- PSPeter Singer
Yes, that kind of capability may be closer. Um, but I don't think it follows that we have to give them rights. I suppose the- the argument for saying that in those circumstances we should give them rights is that if we don't, we'll harden ourselves against other beings who are not robots and who really do suffer. Um, that's a possibility, that, you know, if we get used to looking at a being suffering, uh, and saying, "Yeah, we don't have to do anything about that, that being doesn't have any rights," maybe we'll feel the same about animals, for instance. Uh, and interestingly, among philosophers and thinkers who denied that we have any direct duties to animals, this includes people like Thomas Aquinas and Immanuel Kant, they did say, "Yes, but still it's better not to be cruel to them, not because of the suffering we're inflicting on the animals, but because if we are, we may develop a cruel disposition-"
- LFLex Fridman
Right.
- PSPeter Singer
"... and this will be bad for humans, you know, because we would more likely be cruel to other humans and that would be wrong." Um, so...
- LFLex Fridman
But you don't accept that kind of...
- PSPeter Singer
I don't accept that as a... the- the basis of the argument for why we shouldn't be cruel to animals. I think the basis of the argument for why we shouldn't be cruel to animals is just that we're inflicting suffering on them and the suffering is a bad thing. Um, but possibly, I might accept some sort of parallel of that argument as a reason why you shouldn't be cruel to these, uh, robots that mimic the symptoms of pain if- if it's gonna be harder for us to distinguish.
- LFLex Fridman
I would venture to say, I would... I'd like to disagree with you and with most people, I think. Uh, at the risk of sounding crazy, I would like to say that if that Roomba is dedicated to faking the consciousness and the suffering, I think we will, it will be impossible for us. I would s- I would like to apply the same argument as with animals to robots, that they deserve rights in that sense. Now, we might outlaw the addition of those kinds of features into Roombas, but once you do, I think... I'm quite surprised by the upgrade in consciousness that the display of suffering creates. It's a totally open world, but I'd like to just... S- sort of the difference between animals and other humans is that in the robot case, we've added it in ourselves, therefore we can say something about the... how real it is. But I would like to say that the display of it is what makes it real. And there's somewh- I- and I'm not a philosopher.
- PSPeter Singer
Mm-hmm.
- LFLex Fridman
I'm not making that argument, but I'd at least like to add that as a possibility. And I've been surprised by it, is- is all I'm trying to sort of, um, articulate-
- PSPeter Singer
Right.
- LFLex Fridman
... poorly, I suppose.
- PSPeter Singer
So there is a philosophical view, um, uh, has been held about humans which is rather like what you're talking about, and that's behaviorism. Um, so behaviorism was employed both in psychology, people like B.F. Skinner was a famous behaviorist. But, um, in psychology it was more a kind of a, what is it that makes this science? Well, you need to have behavior because that's what you can observe. You can't observe consciousness.... but in philosophy, the view d-defended by people like Gilbert Ryle, who was a professor of philosophy at Oxford, wrote a book called The Concept of Mind, um, in which, uh, you know, in this kind of phase, this is in the '40s, of linguistic philosophy, he said, "Well, the- the meaning of a term is its use, and we use terms like so-and-so is in pain when we see somebody writhing or screaming or trying to escape some stimulus." And that's the meaning of the term. So, that's what it is to be in pain, uh, and you- you point to the behavior. Uh, and, uh, (laughs) Norman Malcolm, who was another philosopher in the school from Cornell, uh, had- had the view that, you know, so what is it to dream? After all, we can't see other people's dreams. Well, when people wake up and say, "I've just had a dream of, you know, here I was undressed, walking down the main street," or whatever it is you've dreamt, um, that's what it is to have a dream. It's to- basically, to wake up and recall something. Um, so you could apply this to- to what you're talking about, um, and say, so what it is to be in pain is to exhibit these symptoms of pain behavior, and therefore these robots are in pain. That's what the word means. But nowadays, not many people think that Ryle's kind of philosophical behaviorism is really very plausible. So, I think they would say the same about your view.
- LFLex Fridman
So, uh, yes, and I- I just spoke with Noam Chomsky, uh, who-
- PSPeter Singer
Ah.
- LFLex Fridman
... basically was part of, uh, um, dismantling the behaviorist m- movement.
- PSPeter Singer
Yes, yes.
- LFLex Fridman
But... And I'm with that 100% for studying human behavior, but I am one of the few people in the world who has made Roombas scream in pain (laughs) and, uh, I just don't know what to do with that empirical evidence, because it's hard- sort of philosophically, I agree.
- PSPeter Singer
Mm-hmm.
- LFLex Fridman
But, uh, the only reason I philosophically agree in that case is because I was the programmer. Well, if somebody else was the programmer, I'm not sure I would be able to interpret that well. So, it's a- I think it's a new world, uh, that, uh... I was just curious what your thoughts are. For now, you feel that the display of the- what we can kind of intellectually, say, is a- a fake display of, uh, suffering is not suffering?
- PSPeter Singer
That's right. That would be my view. But that's consistent, of course, with the idea that it's part of our nature to respond to this display, if it's reasonably authentically done, uh, and therefore it's understandable that people would feel this, um, and maybe, as I said, it's even a good thing that they do feel it, and you wouldn't want to harden yourself against it because then you might harden yourself against beings who are really suffering.
- LFLex Fridman
But there's this line, you know. So, you said, once age- uh, uh, artificial general intelligence system, a human level intelligence system become conscious... I guess, if I could just linger on it. Uh, now I've wrote really dumb programs that just say things that I told them to say. But how do you know when a- when a system like Alexa, which is sufficiently complex that you can't introspect of how it works, starts giving you signs of consciousness through natural language, that there- there's a- there's a feeling there's another entity there that's self-aware, that has a fear of death, a mortality, that has, um, awareness of itself that we kind of associate with other living creatures. It- l- s- I guess I'm sort of trying to do the slippery slope from the very naive thing where I started into-
- 37:22 – 40:31
Animal liberation
- PSPeter Singer
- LFLex Fridman
If it's okay with you, if we can go back just briefly. So 44 years ago, like you mentioned, 40-plus years ago, you've written Animal Liberation, the classic book that started... that, uh, launched... uh, was the foundation of the movement of animal liberation. Do you... can you summarize the key set of ideas that underpin that book?
- PSPeter Singer
Certainly. The, the key idea that underlies that book is the concept of speciesism, which, uh, I did not invent that term. I took it from a man called Richard Ryder who was in Oxford when I was, and I saw a pamphlet that he'd written about, uh, experiments on chimpanzees that used that term. Um, but I think I contributed to making it philosophically more precise and to getting it into a, to a broader audience. And the idea is that we have a bias or a prejudice against taking seriously the interests of beings who are not members of our species. Uh, just as in the past, uh, Europeans, for example, had a bias against taking seriously the interests of Africans. Uh, racism. And men have had a bias against taking seriously the interests of, of women. Uh, sexism. So I think something analogous, not completely identical, but something analogous, goes on and has gone on for a very long time with the way humans see themselves vis-a-vis animals. We see ourselves as more important. Uh, we see animals as existing to serve our needs in various ways. And you can find this very explicit in, uh, earlier philosophers from Aristotle through to Kant and others. Uh, and, um, either we don't need to take their interests into account at all, uh, or we can discount it because they're not humans. They, they count a little bit, but they don't count nearly as much as humans do. Uh, my book argues that that attitude is responsible for a lot of the things that we do to animals that are wrong. Confining them indoors in very crowded, cramped conditions, in, in factory farms to produce meat or eggs or milk more cheaply, uh, using them in some research that's by no means essential for our survival or well-being, uh, and a whole lot... you know, some of the sports and, uh, things that we do to animals. So, uh, I think that's unjustified because I think, uh, the significance of pain and suffering does not depend on the species of the being who is in pain or suffering any more than it depends on the race or sex of the being who is in pain or suffering. Uh, and I think we ought to rethink our treatment of animals along the lines of saying, if the pain is just as great in an animal, then it's just as bad, uh, that it happens as if it were a human.
- LFLex Fridman
Maybe if I could ask... uh, I, I apologize. Hopefully it's not a ridiculous question. But, um...
- 40:31 – 43:32
Question for AI about suffering
- LFLex Fridman
so as far as we know, we cannot communicate with animals through natural language. But we would be able to communicate with robots. So r- returning to sort of a small parallel between perhaps animals and the future of AI. If we do create an AGI system, or as we approach creating that AGI system, what kind of questions would you ask her to try to... to try to intuit whether, whether there is consciousness, whether... or, more importantly, whether there's capacity to suffer?
- PSPeter Singer
I might ask the AGI, uh, what she was feeling. To... uh, uh, well, does she have feelings? And if she says yes, to describe those feelings, to describe what they were like, to see what the phenomenal account of consciousness is like. Um, that's one question. Uh, I might also try to find out if the AGI has a sense of itself. Um, so for example, the idea... uh, would you... you know, we often ask people, "So, suppose you were in a car accident and your brain were transplanted into someone else's body. Do you think you would survive or would it be the person whose body was still surviving, you know, your body having been destroyed?" Um, and most people say, "I think I would. You know, if my brain was transplanted along with my memories and so on, I would survive." So, we could ask AGI those kinds of questions. Uh, if they were transferred to a different piece of hardware, would they survive? What would survive?
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
Uh, yeah, that, that sort of concept.
- LFLex Fridman
S- sort of on that line, another perhaps absurd question, but do you think having a body is necessary for consciousness? So, do you think digital beings can suffer?
- PSPeter Singer
... presumably, digital beings need to be running on some kind of hardware, right? It-
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah. That ultimately boils down to it, but this is exactly what you just said, is moving the brain-
- PSPeter Singer
Right.
- LFLex Fridman
... from place to another.
- PSPeter Singer
So, you could move it to a different kind of hardware-
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah.
- PSPeter Singer
... you know, and they could say, "Look, you know, your hardware is needs, is getting worn out. We're going to transfer you to a fresh piece of hardware. So, we're gonna shut you down for a time, but don't worry, you know, you'll be running very soon on a nice fresh piece of hardware." Um, and you could imagine this, uh, conscious AGI saying, "That's fine. I don't mind having a little rest. Just make sure you don't lose me or something like that."
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
Um...
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah. I mean, that's an interesting thought that, uh, even with us humans, the suffering is in the software. We- we right now don't know how to repair the hardware.
- PSPeter Singer
Yeah.
- LFLex Fridman
But we're learn- we're getting better at it, uh, and better in the idea, I mean, a lot of... Some people dream about one day being able to transfer certain aspects of the software to another piece of hardware.
- 43:32 – 45:11
Neuralink
- LFLex Fridman
Wh- what do you think, just on that topic, um, there's been a lot of exciting innovation in, uh, brain computer interfaces. I don't know if you're familiar with the companies like Neuralink with Elon Musk, communicating both ways from a computer, being able to send, activate neurons and being able to read spikes from neurons, with- with the dream of being able to expand, sort of increase the bandwidth at which your brain can, like, look up articles on Wikipedia kind of thing.
- PSPeter Singer
Mm. Yeah.
- LFLex Fridman
Sort of expand the cap- the knowledge capacity of the brain. Do you think that notion is, um, is that interesting to you as- as the expansion of the human mind?
- PSPeter Singer
Yes. That's very interesting. Um, I'd love to be able to have that increased bandwidth.
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
Um, and I, you know, I want better access to my memory, I have to say, too.
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
As I get older, you know, you... I- my- I talk to my wife about things that we did 20 years ago or something. Her memory is often better about particular events. Where were we? Who was at that event? What did he or she wear even? She may know, and I have not the faintest idea about this-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... but perhaps it's somewhere in my memory, and if I had this extended memory, I could- I could search that particular year and-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... rerun those things. I think that would be great.
- LFLex Fridman
In some sense, we already have that by storing so much of our data online, like pictures of different events.
- PSPeter Singer
Yes. Well, Gmail is fantastic for that-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... because, you know, people- people email me as if they know me well-
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah.
- PSPeter Singer
... and I haven't got a clue who they are, but then I search for their name, and-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs) Exactly.
- PSPeter Singer
... "Ah, yes. They emailed me in 2007."
- LFLex Fridman
That's right.
- PSPeter Singer
Um, and I know who they are now.
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah. So, we're already... We're taking the first steps already.
- 45:11 – 51:08
Control problem of AI
- LFLex Fridman
So, on the flip side of AI, uh, people like Stuart Russell and others focus on the control problem, value alignment, uh, in AI, which is the problem of making sure we build systems that align to our own values, our ethics. Do you think, sort of high level, how do we go about building systems, do you think, is it possible, that align with our values, align with our eth- human ethics or living being ethics?
- PSPeter Singer
Presumably, it's- it's possible to do that. Um, I know that there are a lot of people who think that there's a real danger that we won't, that we'll more or less accidentally lose control of- of AGI. Uh-
- LFLex Fridman
Do you have that fear, yourself personally?
- PSPeter Singer
Um... (pauses) I'm not quite sure what to think. Uh, I talked to philosophers like, uh, Nick Bostrom and Toby Ord, and they think that this is a real problem, uh, we need to worry about. Um, then I talk to people who work for Microsoft or DeepMind or somebody, and they say, "No. We're not really that close to producing, uh, AGI, you know, superintelligence." Uh-
- LFLex Fridman
So, if you look at Nick Bostrom's sort of, the arguments, that it's very hard to defend. So I'm, of course... And I am myself engineer AI systems, so I'm more with the DeepMind folks where it seems that we're really far away. But then the counterargument is, is there any fundamental reason we'll, that we'll never achieve it? And if not, then eventually there will be a- a dire existential risk, so we should be concerned about it. And do you have, do you have, uh, do you find that argument at all appealing in this domain or any domain, that eventually this will be a problem, so we should be worried about it?
- PSPeter Singer
Yes. I think it's a problem. I think there's... that's a valid point. Um, of course, when you say eventually, uh, that raises the question, how far off is that? And is there something that we can do about it now? Because if we're talking about this is gonna be 100 years in the future, uh, and you consider how rapidly our knowledge of artificial intelligence has grown in the last 10 or 20 years, it seems unlikely that there's anything much we could do now that would influence whether this is going to happen, uh, 100 years in the future. You know, people in 80 years in the future would be in a much better position to say, "This is what we need to do to prevent this happening." than- than we are now. So, to some extent I find that reassuring, but I'm all in favor of some people doing research into this to see if indeed it is that far off, uh, or if we are in a position to do something about it sooner. Um, I'm- I'm very much of the view that, uh, extinction is a terrible thing, and therefore even if the risk of extinction is very small, uh, if we can reduce that risk, that's something that we ought to do. Um, my disagreement with some of these people who talk about long-term risks, extinction risks, uh, is only about how much priority that should have as compared to present questions.
- LFLex Fridman
Well, especially if you look at the math of it from a utilitarian perspective, if it's existential risk so everybody dies, that there's like... it feels like an infinity in the math equation that-... that makes the- the math with the priorities difficult to do, that if we don't know the time scale and you can legitimately argue that it's a non-zero probability that it'll happen tomorrow, that... how do you deal with these kinds of existential risks, like from nuclear war, from nuclear weapons, from biological weapons, from... I'm not sure if global warming falls into that category because global warming is a lot more gradual.
- PSPeter Singer
Mm-hmm. And people say it's not an existential risk because there'll always be possibilities of some humans existing, farming in Antarctica or-
- LFLex Fridman
Right.
- PSPeter Singer
... Northern Siberia or something of that sort. Yeah.
- LFLex Fridman
But you don't find the sort of th- the complete existential risks fundamental, um, like an overriding part of the equations of ethics, of what we should do...
- 51:08 – 59:43
Utilitarianism
- PSPeter Singer
... because I know that I would not exchange an hour of my most pleasurable experiences for an hour of my most painful experiences, even I wouldn't have an hour of my most painful experiences even for two hours or ten hours of my most painful experiences. Did I say that correctly?
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
- PSPeter Singer
Okay.
- LFLex Fridman
Maybe 20 hours, then.
- PSPeter Singer
Yeah, well-
- LFLex Fridman
It's not 21. What's the exchange rate? (laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
So, it's, so that's the question-
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah.
- PSPeter Singer
... what is the exchange rate? But I think it's, it can be quite high. So that's why you shouldn't just assume that, um, you know, it's okay to make one person suffer extremely in order to make two people m- much better off. It might be a much larger number. But at some point, I do think you should aggregate, and, and the result will be, even though it violates our intuitions of justice and fairness, whatever it might be, of, uh, giving priority to those who are worse off, um, at some point, I still think that will be the right thing to do.
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah, some complicated non-linear function, um. W- uh, can I ask a sort of out there question, is the more and more we put our data out there, the more we're able to measure a bunch of factors of each of our individual human lives. And I could foresee the ability to, uh, estimate well-being, or whatever, whatever we public- we together collectively agree and is in a good objective function for, from a utilitarian perspective. Do you think it, do you think it'll be possible and is a good idea to push that kind of analysis to make then public decisions, perhaps with the help of AI, that, you know, here's a tax rate, he- here's a tax rate at which well-being will be optimized, and-
- PSPeter Singer
Yeah, that would be great, if we could, if we really knew that, if we could, really could calculate that.
- LFLex Fridman
No, but do you think it's possible to converge towards an agreement amongst humans towards an objective, um, function, or is it just a hopeless pursuit?
- PSPeter Singer
I don't think it's hopeless. I think it's diffi- it would be difficult to get converged towards agreement, at least at present, because some people-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... could say, uh, you know, "I've got different views about justice, and I think you oughta give priority to those who are worse off, um, even though I acknowledge that the gains that the worse off are making are less than the gains that those who are sort of medium badly off could be making." Um, so we still have all of these intuitions that we, we argue about. Uh, so I don't think we would get agreement. But the fact that we wouldn't get agreement, uh, doesn't show that there isn't a right answer there.
- LFLex Fridman
Do you think, who gets to say what is right and wrong? Do you think there's place for ethics oversight from, uh, from the government? So, I- I'm thinking in the case of AI, overseeing what is, uh, what kind of decisions AI can make and not. But also if you look at animal, animal rights, or rather not rights, or perhaps rights, but the ideas you've explored in, in Animal Liberation, who gets to... So you eloquently, beautifully write in your book that this w- here's, you know, we shouldn't do this. But is there some harder rules that should be imposed? Or is this a collective thing we converse towards as a society and thereby make the better and better ethical decisions?
- PSPeter Singer
Politically, I'm, I'm still a Democrat, despite, uh-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... looking at the flaws in democracy and the way it doesn't work always very well. So I don't see a better option than, uh, allowing the public to vote for governments, uh, in accordance with their policies. And I hope that they will vote for policies g- uh, policies that reduce the suffering of animals and, uh, reduce the suffering of distant humans, uh, whether geographically distant or distant because they're future humans. Uh, but I recognize that democracy isn't really well set up to do that. Uh, and in a sense, you could imagine a wise and benevolent, you know, omni-benevolent, uh, leader who would do that better than democracies could. But in the world in which we live, it's difficult to imagine that this leader isn't gonna be corrupted by a variety of in- influences. You know, we've, we've had so many examples of people who've taken power with good intentions and then have ended up being corrupt and favoring themselves. Uh, so I don't know if, you know, that's why, as I say, I, uh, I don't know that we have a better system than democracy to make these decisions.
- LFLex Fridman
Well, so you also pr- discuss effective altruism, which is a mechanism for going around government, for putting the power in the, in the hands of the people to donate money towards causes, to help, you know, to you, you know, to (laughs) remove the middleman and give it directly to the, uh, to the cause that they care about. Sort of, um,
- 59:43 – 1:05:15
Helping people in poverty
- LFLex Fridman
maybe this is a good time to ask, you've, ten years ago, wrote, uh, Life You Can Save, that's now I think available for free online?
- PSPeter Singer
That's right. You can download either the ebook-
- LFLex Fridman
Which-
- PSPeter Singer
... or the audiobook free from thelifeyoucansave.org.
- LFLex Fridman
And what are the key ideas that you present in, in the book?
- PSPeter Singer
The main thing I wanna do in the book is to make people realize that it's not difficult to help people in extreme poverty, uh, that there are highly effective organizations now that are doing this, that they've been independently assessed and verified by, uh, research teams that are expert in this area. Uh, and that it's a fulfilling thing to do to, uh, for at least part of your life, you know, we can't all be saints, but at least one of your goals should be to really make a positive contribution to the world and to do something to help people who, through no fault of their own, are in very dire circumstances and, and living a life that is-... barely or perhaps not at all, um, a decent life for a human being to live.
- LFLex Fridman
So you describe a- a, uh, a minimum ethical standard of giving. What- what advice would you give to people that want to, uh, be effectively altruistic in their life, like live an effective altruism life?
- PSPeter Singer
There are many different kinds of- of ways of living as an effective altruist. Uh, and if you're at the point where you're thinking about your long-term career, I'd recommend you take a look at a website called 80,000 Hours, 80000hours.org, um, which looks at ethical career choices, and they range from, for example, uh, going to work on Wall Street so that you can earn a huge amount of money and then donate most of it to effective charities, to going to work for a really good nonprofit organization so that you can directly use your skills and ability and hard work to further a- a good cause. Or perhaps going into politics, uh, maybe small chances, but big payoffs-
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
... in- in politics. Uh, go to work in the public service where, if you're talented, you might rise to a higher level where you can influence decisions. Uh, do research in an area where the payoff could be great. There are a lot of different opportunities, but, um, too few people are even thinking about those questions. They're just going along in some sort of preordained rut, uh, to particular careers. Maybe they think they'll earn a lot of money and have a comfortable life. But they may not find that as fulfilling as actually knowing that they're making a positive difference to the world.
- LFLex Fridman
What about in terms of, uh... So that's like long term, 80,000 Hours. Sort of shorter term giving part of... Well, actually it's a part of that, you go to wa- walk, work at Wall Street, if you would like to give a percentage of your income that you talk about and life you can save there. I mean, it's- it's... I was looking through, it's quite a compelling, um... It's... I mean, I'm- I'm, uh, I'm just a dumb engineer, so I like... There's simple rules.
- PSPeter Singer
Right, right.
- LFLex Fridman
There's a nice percentage. (laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
Okay. So I do actually set out, uh, suggested levels of giving, because people often ask me about this. Um, a popular answer is, you know, give 10%, the traditional tithe that's recommended in Christianity and also Judaism. Uh, but, you know, why should it be the same percentage irrespective of your income? Uh, our tax scales reflect the idea that the more income you have, the more you can pay tax. And I think the same is true in what you can give. So, uh, I- I do set out a progressive donor scale which starts out at 1% for people on modest incomes and rises to 33 1/3% for people who are really earning a lot. And my idea is that I don't think any of these amounts really impose real hardship on- on people, uh, because they are progressive and geared to income. Uh, so I think anybody can do this and can know that they're doing something significant to play their part in reducing the huge gap between people in extreme poverty in the world and people living affluent lives.
- LFLex Fridman
And aside from it being an ethical life, it's one that you find more fulfilling because, like there's something about our human nature that... or some of our human natures, maybe most of our human nature, that enjoys doing the- the ethical thing.
- PSPeter Singer
Yes, I make both those arguments, that it... you know, it is an ethical requirement in the kind of world we live in today to help people in great need when we can easily do so. But also that it is a- a rewarding thing and there's good psychological research showing that, uh, people who give more tend to be more satisfied with their lives. And I think this has something to do with- with having a purpose that's larger than yourself. Um, and therefore never being, if you like, never- never being bored sitting around, "Oh, you know, what will I do next? I've got nothing to do." Um, in a world like this, there are many good things that you can do and enjoy doing them. Plus you're working with other people in the effective altruism movement who are forming a community of other people with similar ideas and they tend to be interesting, thoughtful, and good people as well. And having friends of that sort is another big contribution to having a
- 1:05:15 – 1:09:08
Mortality
- PSPeter Singer
good life.
- LFLex Fridman
So we talked about big things that are beyond ourselves, but we- we're- we're also just human and mortal. Do you ponder your own mortality? Is there insights about your philosophy, the ethics that you gain from pondering your own mortality?
- PSPeter Singer
Clearly, you know, as you get into your 70s, you can't help thinking about your own mortality. Uh, but I don't know that I have great insights into that from my philosophy. Um, I don't think there's anything after the death of my body, you know, assuming that we won't be able to upload my mind into anything at the time when I die. Um, so I don't think there's any afterlife or anything to look forward to in that sense. Uh...
- LFLex Fridman
Do you fear death? So if you look at Ernest Becker and describing the motivating aspects, uh, of the... our- our ability to be cognizant of our mortality, do you have any of those elements in- in your drive and your motivation in life?
- PSPeter Singer
I suppose the fact that you have only a limited time to achieve the things that you want to achieve, um, gives you some sort of motivation to-
- LFLex Fridman
Yeah.
- PSPeter Singer
... get going in achieving them. And if we thought we were immortal, we might say, "Ah, you know, I can put that off for another decade or two." Um, so there's that about it. But otherwise, you know, no, I'd- I'd rather have more time to do more. I'd also like to be able to see how things go that I'm interested in. You know, is climate change gonna turn out to be as dire as a lot of scientists say that it is- is going to be? Will we somehow scrape through with less damage than we thought? Um, I'd really like to know the answers to those questions, but I guess I'm not going to.
- LFLex Fridman
Well, you said there's nothing afterwards.So, let me ask an even more absurd question. What do you think is the meaning of it all? The, the...
- PSPeter Singer
I think the meaning of life is the meaning we give to it. I don't think that we were brought into the universe for any kind of larger purpose. But given that we exist, I think we can recognize that some things are objectively bad, extreme suffering is an example, and other things are objectively good, like having a, a rich, fulfilling, enjoyable, pleasurable life. Uh, and we can try to do our part in reducing the bad things and increasing the good things.
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs) So, one way, the meaning (laughs) is to do a little bit more of the good things, objectively good things, and a little bit less of the bad things.
- PSPeter Singer
Yeah. So, do as, as much of the good things as you can and as little of the bad things.
- LFLex Fridman
Peter, beautifully put. I don't think there's a better place to end it. Thank you so much for-
- PSPeter Singer
Great.
- LFLex Fridman
... talking today. (laughs)
- PSPeter Singer
(laughs) Thanks very much, Lex. It's been really interesting talking to you.
- LFLex Fridman
(laughs) Thanks for listening to this conversation with Peter Singer, and thank you to our sponsors, Cash App and Masterclass. Please consider supporting the podcast by downloading Cash App and using the code LEXPODCAST and signing up at masterclass.com/lex. Click the links, buy all the stuff. It's the best way to support this podcast and the journey I'm on, my research and startup. If you enjoy this thing, subscribe on YouTube, review it with five stars on Apple Podcasts, support on Patreon, or connect with me on Twitter @lexfridman, spelled without the E, just F-R-I-D-M-A-N. And now, let me leave you with some words from Peter Singer. "What one generation finds ridiculous, the next accepts. And the third shudders when it looks back at what the first did." Thank you for listening, and hope to see you next time.
Episode duration: 1:09:13
Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript
Transcript of episode llh-2pqSGrs
Get more out of YouTube videos.
High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.
Add to Chrome