10 ms·
I don't think this is quite right. Suppose someone says "I care about white people because I am a white person" (and doesn't care at all about black people) or
by gjm11 8y ago
I don't think this is quite right. Suppose someone says "I care about white people because I am a white person" (and doesn't care at all about black people) or says "I care about women because I am a woman" (and doesn't care at all about men) or says "I care about psychologists because I am psychologist" (and doesn't care at all about people in any other line of work). Would any of those seem obviously reasonable? They wouldn't to me.
So, if caring only about Indians because you're Indian isn't reasonable but caring only about humans because you're human isn't reasonable, what's the relevant difference? That seems to me a question it's perfectly fair to ask. And some possible answers to the question don't make it obvious that the distinction between humans and hypothetical robots with minds that resemble ours enough (e.g.) for us to talk with them is one that justifies caring about humans and not caring about those robots.
- dpark 8y agoLook at human history and you’ll find there’s very little relevant difference. Humans tend to generally decide that any “external group” is low value. The level of value is tightly correlated with how much we identify with the group. When white Americans saw blacks as savages closer to animals than “humans”, whites traded blacks as slaves and argued it was morally right. We mourn gorillas but not giant squid because we identify more with gorillas. The question for robots is whether we’ll ever identify with them strongly. I’m doubtful.