0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
No axioms apart from the Golden Rule itself. Humans being intellectually strong but physically weak, we survive and prosper by collaboration. If we generally treat others as we would wish to be treated, we get along and achieve stuff because our collaboration lacks resentment.
In other word, human would face higher risk of extinction, which is bad.
Only for humans. We are of no cosmic significance, and as far as other species are concerned we are mostly either food, competition for food, or predators.
I don't recall anyone mourning the loss of smallpox, and the extinction of malarial plasmodia doesn't have any obvious prospective downside. If the dinosaurs hadn't died out, would we even exist?
Best AnswerQuote (selected)ModifyRemoveRe: Is there a universal moral standard?« Reply #577 on: 07/09/2020 10:34:26 »The advantage of deductive reasoning is that your answer would be a logical necessity, as long as you provide correct premises and proceed with valid procedures. To guarantee correctness of the premises, we need to list them down in detail with unambiguous definitions, and compare them with known observation result of objective reality. Hence in order to refute the conclusion, all you need to do is point out which premise is incorrect. You would then can fix it to get the correct answer.
Previously I've shown
Since we have no way of knowing what non-humans think about anything, we have no test of the absolute universality of any moral standard. The best we can achieve is whatever appeals to humans, and as we know that humans are very varied, we have to assume in the first instance that each of us is no worse a sample of the population than any other individual.
I have described consciousness in this thread as well as my other threads discussing about universal terminal goal.Since they haven't seem enough, here is a simplified description by stating absolute minimum requirements for a system to be called conscious.- It has internal structures which represent states of itself and its environment.- That internal structures can change according to the change of the environment.
"Nerve cells that represent visual input without subjective components are expected to respond in the same way to a visual stimulus of constant intensity," Nieder said. "Our results, however, conclusively show that nerve cells at higher processing levels of the crow's brain are influenced by subjective experience, or more precisely, produce subjective experiences."The latest findings, published Friday in the journal Science, suggest consciousness may be more widespread throughout the animal kingdom and its origins farther back on the evolutionary timeline than previously thought.The oldest common relative between humans and crows lived some 320 million years ago. It's possible consciousness arose then, during the geologic period known was the Carboniferous. It's also possible consciousness developed independently in a variety of animal lineages."In any case, the capability of conscious experience can be realized in differently structured brains and independently of the cerebral cortex," Nieder said.
Basic principles of bird and mammal brainsMammals can be very smart. They also have a brain with a cortex. It has thus often been assumed that the advanced cognitive skills of mammals are closely related to the evolution of the cerebral cortex. However, birds can also be very smart, and several bird species show amazing cognitive abilities. Although birds lack a cerebral cortex, they do have pallium, and this is considered to be analogous, if not homologous, to the cerebral cortex. An outstanding feature of the mammalian cortex is its layered architecture. In a detailed anatomical study of the bird pallium, Stacho et al. describe a similarly layered architecture. Despite the nuclear organization of the bird pallium, it has a cyto-architectonic organization that is reminiscent of the mammalian cortex.
We apply different rules to a full self driving car than to a non-fsd car.
There is no exception for philosophers, priests or politicians
Legally you must report colliding with a dog because they are considered "valuable property" and the owner may even be liable for the damage to your car if the dog was not under control,.
But is it safe to stop at all? Your FSD car may be proceeding at a reasonable pace and able to stop on sheet ice, but the truck or bus behind you, can't.