3 ms·

The choice of the word universal is a bit ironic, as the nature of the (physical) universe prevents such a thing from being possible. Unified morality, like a

The choice of the word universal is a bit ironic, as the nature of the (physical) universe prevents such a thing from being possible. Unified morality, like a unified concept of what is “human”, is a temporary consequence of centralization in a single location. Right now, that’s Earth. But good luck maintaining a uniform conception of right and wrong when it takes a few decades to get to the next civilization. For that matter, good luck maintaining a unified concept of human being. Mars, for instance, has a number of qualities that will select for certain traits over others. A colony developing there, sufficiently isolated, would start to develop into a variant quite unlike us earthlings. https://youtu.be/0q_B5X7PBHA https://youtu.be/0q_B5X7PBHA

acituan 5y ago
> The choice of the word universal is a bit ironic, as the nature of the (physical) universe prevents such a thing from being possible. It might look improbable or unlikely, but I don't see how it is impossible. Unity in the underlying organizing principles (logos) of the universe, the idea of pantheistic view of a "god" as "the one" is at least as old as neoplatonism. However far from achieving a full grasp, all life forms find approximating to reality to be highly adaptive and valuable. As such, there could as well be a continuity between our moral values and general structural functional organization of the universe. Even though we are hopelessly unable to compute our way towards it, we could have been incrementally approximating it (while also occasionally deceiving ourselves). One could say the evolution of consciousness was adaptive towards processing these calculations, but by no means a requisite to have some contact with and understanding of a part of reality.
- keiferski 5y ago
  Correct, and I should have used the word unified here as I did later in my comment. It is possible that certain civilizations, without coming into any contact with each other, would arrive at similar moral conclusions based on observing nature. But I still don’t think this is sustainable once we factor in evolution and adaptations to different environments.

acituan 5y ago

> The choice of the word universal is a bit ironic, as the nature of the (physical) universe prevents such a thing from being possible. It might look improbable or unlikely, but I don't see how it is impossible. Unity in the underlying organizing principles (logos) of the universe, the idea of pantheistic view of a "god" as "the one" is at least as old as neoplatonism. However far from achieving a full grasp, all life forms find approximating to reality to be highly adaptive and valuable. As such, there could as well be a continuity between our moral values and general structural functional organization of the universe. Even though we are hopelessly unable to compute our way towards it, we could have been incrementally approximating it (while also occasionally deceiving ourselves). One could say the evolution of consciousness was adaptive towards processing these calculations, but by no means a requisite to have some contact with and understanding of a part of reality.

keiferski 5y ago
Correct, and I should have used the word unified here as I did later in my comment. It is possible that certain civilizations, without coming into any contact with each other, would arrive at similar moral conclusions based on observing nature. But I still don’t think this is sustainable once we factor in evolution and adaptations to different environments.