Of what measure is a (non-)human? (Time of Eve)

[jseah]

I do not consider humans special. The value of a creature, human or not, is based on what it can and is willing to do, and what it can potentially do.

Because of this, I consider the talk about free will to be misguided as well. <...> A three-laws robot or some other being similarly barred from choosing some options might not be free in regards to those specific things, but that doesn't mean they lack "free will", period. If they can discern and choose between options on other areas, they are still possessing of one - their free will simply doesn't map out the same as that of a human.

I get reminded why I love this forum.

Very nice points Frozen Feet. So we have... 3 different views on morality now, each of which is internally consistent (I hope)?
(4 if you include me)

Come to think of it, isn't that nearly everyone in this thread? I think that might say something about ethical problems in general.

But yes, I can accept that as a set of ethical principles that allow this 'psychological engineering'. I like it, in fact.

Off-topic:

Spoiler

Show

The ethically important part is to judge yourself and others based on actual qualities and differences, instead of imaginary ones based on bias or prejudice, or just stupidity. Admittedly, humans have been pretty awful at this part, but the point remains.

That's not necessarily the ethically important part under certain systems. But it's certainly the 'correct' way to do it since you'd have a faulty judgement otherwise. (where 'correct' means accurate in a predictive sense)

Yet, at times, this is not possible. Lack of information or lack of time. Then you do use stereotypes and say "in the past, 80% of X have acted this way, I shall guess this particular X will do the same" and simply accept that you will be wrong 20% of the time because it is not practical to try to determine whether this particular X you are dealing with is one of those 20%.

Substitute numbers with experience/information sources and single X's with entire groups and you get racism. Perhaps justified, but still racism.

This might go right back to tribal humanity- "negative rights".

And with relevance to this thread:
Therefore, these things are dependent on the actual needs/circumstances of the particular type of sentients it applies to.

Morality by humans isn't necessarily the same when conceived of by non-humans.

Its hard to tell which one is better since that's like comparing apples and oranges.