Re: physical pain is bad (was Re: Dynamic ethics)

From: Phillip Huggan (
Date: Tue Jan 24 2006 - 14:06:45 MST

The slippery slope actually goes the other way but adding a Rights Charter admitting all individual persons and animals prevents Charter members from being turned into Jupiter Brains. The lion post-singularity has a right not to be murdered/tortured and a right to immunization and whatever else can be easily administered. Neither people nor lions should have the right to kill. They can both hunt realistic robots instead.
  Micromanaging lower organisms is to serve their ends, not ours. The problem is you are assuming a species population has some value apart from the individual
animals that compose it. This is not true. Ecosystems have no value save for pleasure and pain that its members experience. Trade in your reverance of evolution for reverence of individual qualities-of-life.
Philip Goetz <> wrote:
  Obviously I don't hold up the current human level of those things as
sacrosanct, since I said that the lion must have rights in a way
analagous to the way humans do.

If you don't give lower organisms autonomy, and if you micromanage the
entire environment, then you are going to end up organizing everything
towards your ends. It would make no sense to preserve any lower
species at all. Whatever they were naturally, you could redesign them
in a way that would be more directed towards your goals. None of this
"we're going to keep lions in a simulation!" crap. Either lower
organisms have some autonomy, some rights to resources, or we vaporize
them and turn Earth into a Jupiter brain, and There Can Be Only One.

 What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT