[ExI] Libertarianism wins again...

[Stefano Vaj]

2011/7/27 Dan <dan_ust at yahoo.com>

> Since you seem to agree with self-determination, then wouldn't this impose
> a side constraint on everyone?
>

This is the alleged "paradox" of relativism, but at least for ethical
relativism I do not really see the problem.

I am not saying that "self-determination" is itself an absolute, universal
moral truth. I simply *take side* for it (needless to say, for mine and for
that of those who think like me in the first place), as a political and not
as a "rational" stance.

Universalists and relativists are both equally able to fight for their ideas
or collective interests, for better and worse. The only difference is that
relativists do not need to feel on the side of some kind of "objective"
angels to do that, and that they need not think to have a moral duty to
impose their views (be it just those related to "core moral tenets") on
others.


> Regarding how you see morality or political philosophy, I don't think the
> choice is between transhumanism and a 'parochial "yuck reaction."' (I
> actually believe many different views on this are compatible with
> transhumanism, but this means little. This is like saying many different
> views of morality are compatible with atheism. This doesn't tell us whether
> all these views are equivalent or just as acceptable.)
>

What I am saying here is that if the "yuck reaction" is recognised as a
purely relative and contingent factor, there is no real reason why those who
do not share it (say, some hypothetically technophile inhabitants of the
Tonga islands) should not be left to their own devices, in spite of their
moral views being that of a vanishingly small minority in global terms.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110727/dd414f89/attachment.html>