Sounds like an excuse for bad behavior but it’s probably generally correct or not — can’t say for sure because it’s relative and stuff.

Sounds like an excuse for bad behavior but it’s probably generally correct or not — can’t say for sure because it’s relative and stuff.

Is moral relativity an absolute moral stance though?

Makes sense but I wonder: What of activism? If a group feel morality is not relative and decides that enforcing their moral code on others is valid, what would someone who believes morality is relative do? Should they work to enforce relative morality, or allow moral relativity to be trampled upon?

==

Example: Colonialism.

Math – yeah, I hit that paradox when looking at Set theory trying to find its root… and when I did it was an axiom containing a logical paradox and I was like, “ok, buh bye “The-Universe-is-Math””. Oddly satisfying.

===

Or what’s said of physics: “Just give us ONE miracle and we’ll explain the rest”.

===

I give them credit for trying. They got as far as they could in the 1920s or so and after hitting that, they moved to 2nd order logic and from that, eventually, programming. It doesn’t bother with that nugget of paradox at all, allowing variables to be relative and choice-based and unfolding and changing over Time – allowing them to make computers to compute later on, rather than trying to come up with perfectly logically consistency, which was ultimately just impossible.

===

Then the big problem shifted from perfect first order logic to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-completeness – although THAT can be chipped away by treating problems situationally rather than always looking for absolute universals.

===

For a “sort of absolute-ish” morality, I’d personally go with https://en.wikipedia.org/…/Universal_Declaration_of… – as it’s hard to argue rationally against basic human rights, although many try for their own reasons.

===

If you’re communicating on the interwebz you’re automatically a nerd. Sorry Eric but it’s time you learned the truth about your true nature.

It’s hard not to anthropomorphize alien life in some way. Even when we study Earth life, there’s homologues to mouth, hand, etc, basing all life on Earth in some way to us. But for aliens, it might be “no homo”. Dunno.

===

If a metaphor does not exist and cannot be built from other metaphors, it might not be possible for us to recognize alien life at all.

===

Ethically I’m fine with animism Seems to be a basic human religion to start with at least. Maybe it’ll be the one to end with. Haven’t decided for myself.

I think it’s good to explore these extrapolations of ourselves by placing them in varieties of alien forms. Like funhouse mirror distortions. I don’t know if there’s an absolute dividing line but I suppose we have to pick somewhere and go with it. In Star Trek, bipeds, tech advancements, almost complete anthropomorphizing was fine there. The threshhold for intelligence was pretty set as “clearly human like”, yet it works for that universe.

Org charts. Yah, I prefer animal collectives with choice as it better explains the outliers.

===

Yup. The fact that “not all [bees, ants, humans]” behave identical tells me there’s autonomy. Pheramones might be “strong encouragement” but if observation doesn’t show absolute lockstep compliance with no deviation then it points to autonomy while being compelled.

===

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


seven × 5 =

Leave a Reply