[ExI] experiment regarding ethical behaviors vs status:

[Stefano Vaj]

On 27 March 2012 13:19, The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>wrote:

> Eating your own species or even too close to your own species is super bad
> idea from a health and nutritional perspective.


Yes, I appreciate your argument, and this qualifies to some extent the
statement that in principle poisons are in vegetals.


> Don't get hung up on cannibalism. Substitute any taboo or 'evil' behavior
> in the place of cannibalism, and it would still sound true. If somebody put
> a gun to your head and forced you to break the law, would not most juries
> acquit you of whatever crime you may have comitted under duress? Is not
> justifiable homicide in self-defense somewhat similar to murder under
> duress? Are married men who get raped in prison commiting adultery on their
> wives?
>

OK. But my point is that cannibalism, in spite of a strong yuck factor,
probably need not require "ethically" the kind of "extreme" pressure, or
lack of choice, required for absolution from other sins. You cannot kill
somebody to steal a pie because you are "normally" hungry, and not
presently starving to death, but if you eat some human flesh the fact of
being positively hungry would be probably considered as enough of a
justification by many.

All the rest certainly helps. Also I notice you did not instantly conflate
> status with wealth or other forms of power. That is perceptive of you. More
> so than the Berkeley study.
>

;-)

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20120327/77cd2aaa/attachment.html>