ok. but do you have an illustrative example? its ok if you dont.
Look at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on metaethics
1 Like
Killing 1 random baby versus 1 homeless adult versus 2 random babies versus a teenaged bill gates
Rank it from most good to most evil
There are literal examples on the Wikipedia page
do you think consciousness is contained within our experiences/vice versa, or is it more interactive with the world?
(this is me exercising questioning out of my ass)
He doesn't read Wikipedia pages. Just the first paragraph
ye so the thing in contention is whether
- babies are worth more than adults
- bill gates is worth more than homeless people
- 2 people are worth more than 1 person
are there better and worse ways in theory to decide the answer to these?
with my Phil/psych/cog sci background I can confidently say that I have no idea where consciousness resides
I know
none? hmm
Each branch has their own idea and while all make good arguments on their own (and each one doesnāt even have the same argument) when compared to one another thereās never been an āaha this is the oneā for me
fair enough
Why are you thinking their worth has anything to do with it?
replace "worth" with the structure "it is preferable to kill X over Y" then. im thinking the intent is to construct principles and ask if some principles are better than others. is there some way to judge which principles are better than others?
Yeah so Iād need to do more research but I am absolutely okay with not knowing exactly where and with the world not knowing because the moment we find out where the consciousness is, we can find out how to cut/copy/paste consciousness and parts of consciousness and then were that much closer to the singularity
You donāt have to think about it yourself
Just go read the article
:/ neither article discusses this particular example. i am not against the article. i just wanted to know if you had an illustrative example.
There's so many different frameworks for evaluating this. Hint: the wiki article goes over a lot, then the SEP goes over even more and gets more in depth on them. Put in some fucking effort
doesnt this suffer from the same question? what rationale is there for one framework being better than the other?
And for the record, Iām not saying their worth doesnāt have anything to do with it. Iām merely asking why that was the first thing you thought of when approaching this moral conundrum and what relevance it held to the overall discussion of right and wrong
Which is what meta ethics does