Quote:
Originally Posted by cypher197
Basically, we cannot be certain our reality is the top-level reality, so the moral theory must be able to survive and function even if it isn't. This is part of why the theory describes linked realities.
|
We can't be certain but it's the first reality of which we are cognitive of. Therefore it's the one by which we judge the value of all other, an escapism of sorts.
Quote:
|
The criteria merely describe whether some reality is 'useful'. A reality which is highly unpredictable is less useful for implementing a moral theory, but subjects could still experience value within/interacting with it. Of course, that unpredictability means the situation could become quite dire with no forewarning, or undesired events could happen seemingly randomly.
|
There is always an element of unpredictability and undesirability to each reality. Because of physical limitations that a subject may have the consequences of each action are highly unpredictable. Even a program will have an element of deviation from the set norms, an unexpected behavior. While not observable by the spectators such deviations may have an unintended, consequential value. Despite not being generally useful to the spectator whom has no idea of the change.
Quote:
This version is merely the foundation. Once your have the foundation, you may begin to implement a moral complex moral system, such as a form of Utilitarianism* or other consequentialism. Given that this foundation survives reality nesting, it can be used to properly evaluate possible actions to be taken, and thus guide agents.
For example, I may conclude, with philosophical grounding, that implementing human rights in a legal framework is a good thing, because of the good effects it causes. I may evaluate certain rights implementations as being better than others based on evidence.
(*I can discuss a version of Utilitarianism that I've been working on later, if there's interest.)[COLOR="DarkSlateGray"]
|
Precisely because it's a foundation there needs to be a opposing reaction. Although that's only because I believe in Hegelian dialects
I would be interested to know about your views in Utilitarianism but I suggest you make another thread to discuss them since we are already discussing a point in this one.