[extropy-chat] Are ancestor simulations immoral?

[A B]

Hi Jef,
   
  Jef writes:
  "Of course, one could easily argue (or simply point out) that you're
consciously seeking pleasure from these activities and emotions."
   
  For sure. But, I would add that my pleasure seeking behavior in the above example is not directly doing harm to any conscious beings, except perhaps to myself - but that right is mine to act on.
   
  Jef:
  "My point was that it is naive, but traditionally and popularly
accepted, to think that pleasure = good. This is not to deny that
they are strongly correlated, but incorrect and dangerous to think
that they are perfectly correlated."
   
  Agreed. But, that's not to say that "pain = good" for anyone besides oneself.
   
  Jef:
  "Should a parent be prohibited from "inflicting pain" on a child, for
example, the pain of being denied something dearly wanted by the
child, and for completely stupid reasons (from the child's point of
view)?"
   
  That's a challenging example. I would hope that in the future, pain of all sorts can be reduced, except where it is sought for personal experience.
   
  Jef:
  "Should you be prohibited from "inflicting death" upon an armed
dangerous intruder threatening your children in your home?"
   
  Another good example. However, I think that self-defense or defense of others is branching into another ethical area. For example, it's hard to invoke a "self-defense" defense for running a "Hell" program. If an armed intruder broke into my home and intended to murder my children (which incidentally I don't actually have) then I would not hesitate to "inflict death" upon him.
   
  Jef:
  "What if your posessions, your freedom and your livelihood are
threatened to be taken away by a foreign government that "knows" your
way of life is evil because your don't worship the correct god? Would
you be willing to use force to defend yourself, your loved ones, your
interests?"
   
  Basically, same as above. In this situation, I would feel entitled to defend myself and my family, friends, country, etc.
   
  You make a lot of good points here.
   
  Best Wishes,
   
  Jeffrey Herrlich

   
  Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
  On 5/30/06, A B wrote:
> An excellent point. Speaking for myself: Sometimes I enjoy a little bit of
> sadness. I never want to loose the ability to be emotionally moved by a work
> of art, for example. I want to be able to "feel" the despair of Mozart's
> Requiem, and sadness is definitely an element of that.

Of course, one could easily argue (or simply point out) that you're
consciously seeking pleasure from these activities and emotions.

My point was that it is naive, but traditionally and popularly
accepted, to think that pleasure = good. This is not to deny that
they are strongly correlated, but incorrect and dangerous to think
that they are perfectly correlated.

> My point, the only
> point that I've been trying to make since the beginning of this thread is
> this: *I* should be the only being that can inflict pain or death on myself.
> No one and nothing else, should have that "freedom". Ever! Under any
> circumstances. And the same goes for any other conscious being, in my
> opinion.

While I appreciate the good intent you express above, from a systems
point of view I see it as somewhat incoherent and unrealistic.

I would also offer this insight: Letting go of an unrealistic ideal
may feel like a loss initially, but it opens the door for the gift of
greater understanding.

Should a parent be prohibited from "inflicting pain" on a child, for
example, the pain of being denied something dearly wanted by the
child, and for completely stupid reasons (from the child's point of
view)?

Should you be prohibited from "inflicting death" upon an armed
dangerous intruder threatening your children in your home?

What if your posessions, your freedom and your livelihood are
threatened to be taken away by a foreign government that "knows" your
way of life is evil because your don't worship the correct god? Would
you be willing to use force to defend yourself, your loved ones, your
interests?

Obviously there are countless examples showing that there is no clear
defining line in such cases. As subjective agents, the best we can do
is act to promote our values based on our internal model approximating
physical reality. Since some actions do in fact work better than
other actions. and given differing models, conflict is intrinsic to
life and a contributor to greater success at a higher level of
organization.

Lest this appear to you to be promoting anarchy, let me emphasize that
humans (and other agents) do share considerable values in common (such
as killing and pain are bad) and increasing awareness of our
increasingly shared values that work tends to lead toward increasingly
moral decision-making.

I'll be happy to continue this discussion depending on your interest.

- Jef
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


		
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20060530/597bf608/attachment.html>