Re: Nick and dishonest behavior

Posted by Steve Smith on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Re-Nick-and-dishonest-behavior-tp3117309p3130377.html

I am way too animistic in my instincts to go for most of this.

Eric said:
Nick's ethical stance would be based on treating things that act in certain ways as equal to all other things that act in certain ways, and it wouldn't get much more prescriptive than that. The acts he would be interested in would be very sophisticated actions, or combination of actions - such as "contributing to the conversation". This may seem strange, but again, it is really, really, really, not that different from a stance that treats all things that "experience in a certain way" as equal.   

Yes, I abhor the killing of people (but can think of circumstances when I would endorse or practice it) and by extension abhor (or at least get really queasy at) the killing of things that look anything like people.  Apes and Monkeys are obvious candidates for the not-kill.   Ditto for things that know how to mimic humans in any way... or have been selected for these traits (think most/all pets, many domesticated animals, etc.).   And add in the things that tweak my  parent feeling (all creatures exhibiting neotony, big eyes, large head/body ratios, etc.).   Then add in the creatures who may not overtly (or recognizeably) remind me of humans (think Dolphins and other Cetaeceans... little gray creatures from UFO's, etc) that I intellectually (if not intuitively) ascribe intelligence and emotions.  

But I can feel the same way about cherished possessions or even coveted possessions of others.  Who hasn't gone to the dump and wanted to pull that "perfectly good armchair" out of the  pile of trash?   I am particularly a sucker for machinery, electronic or otherwise.   Just *try* to throw a "perfectly good" printer/computer/bicycle/chainsaw away in my presence.   I have a boatload (technically a parking-lot-full) of cars that I fell in love with and had to rescue... most of them 20+ years old... and once you rescue them, you can never abandon them, and you can't even foster them out... after all, who is going to love them as much as you?   And yes, they all drive... though I'm not so sure about the old tech in my shed (computers, printers, etc.) but I suspect they do... why not?

OK... I'm sure this is totally off-topic... excepting that I claim that we *project* so much onto inanimate (or barely animate or animate but barely/hardly human) objects that surely we do the same with people?  I don't trust people who claim they can determine my (or anyones) intentions by our actions... it is too fraught with the risk of projection.   Half the never-ending hurt in this world seems to come from our thinking we know what other people's intentions are from their actions... and the other half seems to come from the resulting feedback loop of revenge.

- Steve

PS... I think it is "OK" to kill Nick, but there are many, many reasons I do not.  Not the least of which is that I've become quite fond of him.   So don't anyone else try killing Nick to make the point, I would take it personally, project onto you my own ideas of your motivations and seek revenge based on that projection.  (OK... I know... I'm being disingenuous here...)

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org