Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

25592Re: Multiverse Morality

Expand Messages
  • Ismail Atalay
    Sep 1, 2013
      >On 26 August 2013 07:14, situagent wrote:

      >>In Fabric-of-Reality@yahoogroups.com, Ismail Atalay <i_c_atalay@...> wrote:

      >> However in this type of MWI morality, there is no truly subjective and unique choice. My choice or your choice becomes irrelevant. For example who are "we" when you say "we can go
      >>where we want". In MWI only existential package, there are infinite versions of "me" who are doing the whole range of moral actions from the nastiest and most cruel (unimaginable
      >>cruelty) to the most peaceful and loving. And I do not choose actually, these are just microscopic divergences in my brain cell chemistry leading to different/parallel moral "choices" in parallel universes.

      >There seem to be interesting issues of emergence implicit in this issue. If we were talking about dinosaurs or crocodiles, the issue of morality would not arise. Did morality considerations
      >coevolve with human awareness, knowledge, etc.? If so, are the moral standards that apply proportional to the amount of knowledge that we have acquired?

      Yes I think morality have probably coevolved with human awareness. However moral standards seems more related to the qualitative feature´┐Żof "human awareness" rather than amount of knowledge. Lack of knowledge would could cause biased or wrong decisions but as long as moral standards are kept no big problem from classical morality perspective.

      >Do we have a moral obligation not to be ignorant?

      I would say "yes"

      >If wisdom is not acquired in a simgle lifetime, some paths may be more productive, and some counterparts may surge ahead of others, perhaps via epigenetic inheritance, at least in >particular areas.

      You do not need deep wisdom to uphold moral standards.

      >> Why would I feel any moral responsibility (right here, right know) if I know that whatever I choose, all possible choices and their full implications (from the most nasty/cruel to most >>benign) will occur anyway?
      >Perhaps there are implicit costs that <you> are insufficiently aware of? (Lack of knowledge again.)

      Sorry but I do not understandt this.

      >> Sorry but I could not understand a morality concept without a feeling of moral responsibility, without a genuinely subjective choice and without making a real difference in the way the world exists.

      >I have quite a bit of sympathy for your position but, nonetheless, it seems tpretty close to trying to make morality true by definition. I haven't particularly noticed this to be the case in the world I live it.

      If consciousness and existential awareness is true/genuine and if we assume humans have capability for rationality and logic, moral standards would follow naturally IMHO. If human beings do not follow these standards this would not make them less true.

      Ismail Atalay

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Show all 35 messages in this topic