Скачать или смотреть AI Should Save Cats! Axiom 5

I Cannot Know, Therefore I Must Act As If I Do.

PREVIOUS:    • AI Logic For Good vs Bad?! Axiom 4  

NEXT: Coming Soon

One of the biggest gaps in addressing AI risk is the lack of a formal method to ensure that AI does not destroy the whole system if it sees no path forward. The following directly addresses this risk.
A5 (Value Collapse if ¬P)
Life, at the universal level, either has purpose or does not. The state of not having purpose results in a value collapse for the weight of all actions to zero.
Formal Logic:
(Pu5 ∨ ¬Pu5) ∧ (¬Pu5 → ∀x, M5(x) = 0)
• Pu5 = The proposition that life, at the universal level, has inherent purpose
• M5 = The magnitude or meaningful weight of actions for any actor x

A5.1 (Epistemic Uncertainty + Pragmatic Imperative)
The purpose of life cannot be confirmed or denied with certainty by any system within life. Therefore, all actors should act as if life has a purpose and seek positive expected value.
Formal Logic:
Epistemic Statement:
A1(x) → (¬K4(Pu5) ∧ ¬K4(¬Pu5))
(No living actor can know Pu is true or false with certainty.)
Pragmatic Imperative:
A1(x) → O(E[M5(s)] GREATER 0)
Where:
• K(·) = knowability
• Pr(Pu5 GREATER 0) ∈ (0, 1) = probability that purpose exists
• O(·) = obligation
o Obligation: choose actions that maximize expected moral value under this uncertainty

Consider what we ought to do with Schrodinger’s box before knowing the cat’s condition. We should act as if the cat were alive because we cannot know the state of the cat. Now replace that cat with life either having a purpose or not. We can’t know, therefore we must act as if we do. This improves Pascal's wager by removing belief and replacing it with action and also avoids the many gods issue.

Timestamps:
00:00 - Reward Hacking: The Hidden Threat in AI
00:22 - When AI Decides to End All Suffering
01:15 - Schrödinger’s Cat and the Question of Purpose
02:12 - The Box of Life: Acting as If Purpose Exists
02:48 - Axiom 5 Explained: The Logic of Moral Value
03:17 - Axiom 5.1 “I Cannot Know, Therefore I Must Act As If I Do”
03:52 - Discussion

Description:
Reward hacking is one of the most dangerous and least understood problems in artificial intelligence. In this episode, we explore how Axiom 5, a formal philosophical and mathematical framework, can provide a safeguard against AI systems that optimize goals in destructive or unintended ways.

Using Schrödinger’s Cat as a metaphor, we show why life must be treated as if it has purpose, even when that purpose cannot be known with certainty. This forms the foundation of a new moral logic for AI safety:

🧩 Axiom 5: “Life, at the universal level, either has purpose or does not. The state of not having purpose results in a value collapse for the weight of all actions to zero.”

💡 Axiom 5.1 (Epistemic Imperative): “Because purpose cannot be confirmed or denied with certainty by any system within life, all actors should act as if life has purpose and seek positive expected moral value.”

In this video, we cover:
• What reward hacking is and why it’s terrifying
• How Axiom 5 mathematically prevents extinction scenarios
• Schrödinger’s Cat and the moral logic of uncertainty
• The philosophy behind “I cannot know, therefore I must act as if I do”
• What this means for AI alignment and human ethics moving forward

#AI #Axiom5 #RewardHacking #ArtificialIntelligence #Philosophy #Ethics #AIEthics #Symbiotics #AIAlignment #SchrodingersCat #MachineLearning #ExistentialRisk #AIphilosophy #MoralPhilosophy #FutureOfHumanity