3 ms·

Yes, chimps dictators don’t fare well. That’s not what I meant. Chimps don’t have a complex set of morals about which they discuss and evolve with time. I didn

Yes, chimps dictators don’t fare well. That’s not what I meant. Chimps don’t have a complex set of morals about which they discuss and evolve with time. I didn’t say we know for sure what is good or what is not. But we can abstract the concepts and evolve our morals. Chimps will never get to debate about gay marriage or other “chimp” rights.

nkoren 9y ago
You're moving the goalposts, but are still wrong. I don't have time to dig up the references, but there are plenty of studies showing that apes (and other animals) can develop arbitrary culturally-transmitted "taboos", with violation of those taboos provoking dissent and general politicking. We can't speak to the depths of such a debate, because we can't participate in the debate. It's an (inter-)subjective matter for the animals involved; all we can do as external observes is be objective. But this then leads us into a categorical error: because we can describe a behaviour using objective language, we therefore decide that it in fact contains no subjectivity; eg., is not truly conscious. We used to mis-apply this logic to so-called "inferior" human cultures, denying their humanity because we couldn't get inside their minds. This was wrong, and led to great evil. Until recently, we've applied the same thinking to animals -- but it's just as wrong. There are a shrinking number of Descartian holdouts, and I guess you're one of them. But all evidence and logic is against you.
- pathseeker 9y ago
  You seem to be making a lot of objective claims about things being wrong because they can't be objectively measured. Why can't you use that same reasoning to claim things like homeopathy actually work but we just can't objectively measure why? Additionally, if these things can't be objectively measured, why are you so sure they are true?
fian 9y ago
Never is a long time. Were earlier human ancestors able to " abstract the concepts and evolve our morals"?

nkoren 9y ago

You're moving the goalposts, but are still wrong. I don't have time to dig up the references, but there are plenty of studies showing that apes (and other animals) can develop arbitrary culturally-transmitted "taboos", with violation of those taboos provoking dissent and general politicking. We can't speak to the depths of such a debate, because we can't participate in the debate. It's an (inter-)subjective matter for the animals involved; all we can do as external observes is be objective. But this then leads us into a categorical error: because we can describe a behaviour using objective language, we therefore decide that it in fact contains no subjectivity; eg., is not truly conscious. We used to mis-apply this logic to so-called "inferior" human cultures, denying their humanity because we couldn't get inside their minds. This was wrong, and led to great evil. Until recently, we've applied the same thinking to animals -- but it's just as wrong. There are a shrinking number of Descartian holdouts, and I guess you're one of them. But all evidence and logic is against you.

pathseeker 9y ago
You seem to be making a lot of objective claims about things being wrong because they can't be objectively measured. Why can't you use that same reasoning to claim things like homeopathy actually work but we just can't objectively measure why? Additionally, if these things can't be objectively measured, why are you so sure they are true?

fian 9y ago

Never is a long time. Were earlier human ancestors able to " abstract the concepts and evolve our morals"?