3 ms·
Not feasible. Until we develop an ethical calculus "good" will always be relative. The problem with this is that one cannot infer ethics from logic. Also, huma
by fsloth 11y ago
Not feasible. Until we develop an ethical calculus "good" will always be relative. The problem with this is that one cannot infer ethics from logic. Also, human basic psychology is such that more power one has the less scrupulous one becomes. Therefore, either the group would be within a range of totally good in nature and totally feeble in power, or totally corrupt in nature and totally powerfull.
- jdietrich 11y agoI'd settle for an intelligence organisation that followed basic human rights law. Intelligence is dominated by a "the ends justify the means" attitude that permits all sorts of grave injustices.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoThe problem here is humans in general. Intelligence agencies are created to follow orders of politicians, who often have morally dubious agendas - but at some point those agencies can also discover they have enough power they can do whatever they want without much oversight. I too do dream of S.H.I.E.L.D.
- zo1 11y ago>"The problem with this is that one cannot infer ethics from logic." Of course you can. The problem I assume you're encountering is that you're not starting from irreducible basic premises. Thus, you can't logically resolve the already-existing and conflicting inconsistencies. We are bombarded from birth with very illogical and inconsistent rules about how the world works. All of those things implicitly include "ethical" value systems. They're very hard to reconcile logically after the fact, simply because they're contradictory in nature and we have at that point heavily-invested into building mental models to navigate the world.