[ExI] Medical power of attorney for cryonicsts
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.
>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.
More information about the extropy-chat