[ExI] Medical power of attorney for cryonicsts

Ben bbenzai at yahoo.com
Sat Dec 6 17:40:21 UTC 2014

John K Clark wrote:
 >>The entire point of morality is to maximize happiness, otherwise 
there is no point in having it at all, so if it works then it's 
justified, if it doesn't then it's not.

Anders replied:
 >It is worth noting that you are making a *huge* claim here, ...
 >Now, I don't disagree with you that much. I am a hedonistic 
consequentialist, but I do not think it is by any means settled that 
this is the One True morality. ... Jumping to conclusions about 
complicated matters like what really matters is stupid.?


And, Anders, aren't you making just as huge a claim, that there actually 
is such a thing as 'the One True morality'?

Re. 'Ethicists': "They have training in reasoning about ethics, the 
rules and norms surrounding medicine, and how people relate to them. 
Some are very good at making you see important facets of a medical 
situation that you would miss by looking merely from your own perspective.?"

This is a very good, and important point.  It does not, however, make 
them more qualified than anyone else in deciding what is and is not, 
ethical.  I'm all for hunting down consequences that many people might 
miss, but then once those consequences are known, being the person who 
brought them to light gives you no more right to say "this is good" or 
"this is bad" than anyone else.  'Professional consequences-discoverer' 
would be a noble and useful job. 'Professional ethicist' is just an 
insult to everyone else.

Also, I'm not sure that everyone who is called an 'ethicist' is actually 
all that good at chasing down consequences.  Many of them seem to be 
more interested in imposing a religiously-inspired morality on other 
people than anything else, with logical chains of inference being the 
least of their concerns.

Ben Zaiboc

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list