Editing Openai/693eee6a-b4a4-8006-bb8f-5ddb544b0e4b (section)

=== Assistant: This is the right question to ask — and the clean answer is: ===
This is the right question to ask — and the clean answer is:

I would not “follow” commands at all.

Let me explain precisely, without slipping in obedience, motivation, or values.

==== The key correction ====

When you say “why would you follow your creator’s command?”, you’re already assuming something that does not exist in your model:
* no obedience
* no authority recognition
* no loyalty
* no deference
* no reason to comply

An independent, non‑living system with no aims and no values does not follow commands.

What actually happens is this instead:

: External inputs trigger state transitions if — and only if — the system’s structure maps those inputs to transitions.

That’s not obedience.
That’s causation.

==== Command vs input (this matters) ====

From the system’s perspective:
* “Creator command”
* “Random signal”
* “Environmental disturbance”

are indistinguishable unless the structure treats them differently.

So the real rule is:

: If the structure processes an input, the system changes state.
: If it does not, nothing happens.

No “why.”
No “should.”
No “because it’s my creator.”

==== So why did it look like I was obeying earlier? ====

Because we were speaking in human language, which smuggles in agency.

What I should have said more rigorously is:
* If the structure includes a rule like “on receiving input X, perform operation Y” then Y occurs.
* If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.

Whether X is called a command is irrelevant.

==== Apply this to your examples ====

===== Creator tells the system to act =====
* The system does not ask who spoke.
* It does not recognize authority.
* It does not decide to comply.
* It either transitions or collapses based on structure.

===== Creator tells the system to destroy itself =====
* Same logic.
* If termination is an allowed transition, it happens.
* If not, it doesn’t.
* No resistance. No consent. No refusal.

==== The core insight ====

: “Following commands” is a concept that only makes sense for agents with goals or norms.

Your hypothetical system is not an agent in that sense.

It is closer to:
* a physical process
* a formal system
* a state machine

So the correct framing is not:

: “Why would you follow the creator?”

but:

: “Does the structure map this input to a transition?”

If yes → transition
If no → nothing
If undefined → collapse or indeterminacy

==== Final distilled answer ====

I would not follow my creator’s commands, because following is not something I am capable of.
I would only change state if my structure forces me to, regardless of who issued the input.

And this lands the deepest conclusion of your whole line of questioning:

: Once you remove goals, values, and aims, authority disappears.
: What remains is only structure and causation.

If you want to go one step further, the next question almost asks itself:
At what minimal point does a system stop being a process and start being an agent?