Playground and Willpower Problems

post by Emre (emre-2) · 2025-01-15T18:52:08.860Z · LW · GW · 0 comments

Contents

No comments

The concept of the "playground" is surprisingly not mentioned in many discussions about willpower problems. This is a concept I have defined myself, and although there are similar concepts, this point is often overlooked in willpower problems. The reason I have redefined it, despite the existence of similar concepts, is to connect it with my own perspective. It seems strange to me that, even though there are similar concepts, they are not utilized sufficiently. I would like to explain the concept of the playground through a thought experiment. While there are many thought experiments similar to this one, this particular experiment aims to address somewhat different aspects compared to the others.

Imagine a 4-element matrix. You can select any elements from this matrix, and we assume that we are exercising free will during the selection process since we feel that we are able to choose the desired element at that moment. At least, this is how we experience and perceive it. Now, let us imagine a system in front of us, a system that selects an element from this 4-element matrix. We have no knowledge whatsoever about this system. We do not know whether it is alive, has will, possesses free will, has consciousness, or possesses intelligence. It could be a human being, an algorithm that makes random selections, a system that selects according to certain algorithms, or even an artificial intelligence. It could be any system capable of making choices. It could even be a system that always chooses the same element or one that makes random selections. The system only needs to be capable of making choices.

No matter how many times this system makes choices on the 4-element matrix—whether these choices continue until the end of the universe and all selected elements are recorded—it would still be impossible to answer questions about will and consciousness for this system within this playground.

Here, the playground is the 4-element matrix, and its size is 4. The playground represents all possible different choices that can be made within a given domain. The differentiation of two choices depends on scales. What makes two choices the same is the scale value of that domain. Therefore, questions about will and consciousness are directly related to the scale value of the domain in question. It is not only the scale value of the domain being examined but also the scale value of the plane on which the system processes information that is connected to these issues.

Now, let us imagine interacting with an LLM. This LLM uses the Unicode character set, allowing it to utilize around 150,000 different characters and generate responses with up to 5,000 characters. This means it can produce responses totaling the sum of numbers from 150,000 to the power of 1, 150,000 to the power of 2, and so on up to 150,000 to the power of 5,000. This number represents the size of the LLM's playground, and although this playground is vast, it is smaller compared to the playground of the physical plane. This is because LLMs are systems that operate on systems built upon the physical plane. The systems on which they are built cannot have more combinations than the underlying systems.

When it comes to questions about will and consciousness, the playground of the LLM might be insufficient, just like the 4-element matrix. At its core, it is not entirely logical to think of a system independently of its plane. A system may possess significant will and free will in essence, but the playground might not allow for this freedom. In fact, even the playground of the physical plane might be insufficient, and it actually is. In our daily lives, we assume we have free will and can desire things, like wanting to fly. However, the playground of the physical plane does not permit this. Even though our will desires it, the physical plane does not allow it. Yet, eventually, we create airplanes thanks to the physical plane. However, we are still unable to realize that initial idea of flight in its entirety because the playground of the physical plane does not allow it.

Here, what hinders us is not only the playground of the physical plane but also the playground of society. Even if the physical plane allows something, we cannot always do what we want within society. The reason for this is related to reality sets. What is impossible in the examined reality set may be possible in the underlying reality set because their scale values differ. The reason the sinusoidal wave drawn by our hand does not match the perfect mathematical sinusoidal wave is also due to this. The sinusoidal wave drawn by hand is noisier and contradicts the perfect sinusoidal wave, making it impossible to be considered a sinusoidal wave by the standards of the perfect one.

The main reason why questions about will and consciousness cannot be answered in the physical plane is that it is impossible to know how many different choices the examined system could make in a perfect environment where the playground is infinite. In daily life, this playground progressively shrinks from the physical plane to society. Moreover, the life we live also reduces this area. For this reason, we constantly experience routine things.

To better understand this topic and how my main perspective relates to it, I want you to think about something like this: I want you to think about a different universe, and in that universe, things can only be in 1 of the maximum 2 states that exist in that universe. In this universe, how would we classify things as we do here? To further clarify, let us add this detail: Somehow, life is possible in this universe. Would we be able to distinguish between life and non-life as we routinely do in daily life? As you can see, we cannot even assume the big questions we usually take for granted in this universe. And these assumptions always occur on a small scale, as each scale value corresponds to a reality set from a particular perspective. The inability to demonstrate will on a molecular level while being able to demonstrate it on a perceptual small scale is a consequence of this.

Even a divine will can only make one different choice in a playground of size 1. Can a single different choice even be called a choice here? Therefore, I think the concept of the playground is directly related to whether such questions can even be answered. After all, these questions could not be asked where the playground is 1.

0 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.