Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (96741)	1/25/2005 3:47:52 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793708

You start by assessing whether the entity in question, a spider, is different from you. What is the point of that? I listed that because it is the starting point (often unstated or even unrealized) for the vast majority of people. If something is genetically similar, it must be treated with moral respect. If genetically more distant, it could be lunch (I happen to be vegetarian) or one might kill it for pleasure if not for lunch (I don't hunt). The history of our species is one of struggling to lengthen the vector of morality, if I may use that metaphor. However, most people seem to accomplish this be shortening the perceived vector of genetic distance to those they feel they should treat better. I guess either approach can accomplish the prime objective. To me, one is based more on denial, and has more limited utility when viewed from the big picture of ecology in general. I think it is possible to develop a science based morality. I would expect terms in such a theory to reflect such things as: 1) Genetic vector distance. 2) Intelligence. 3) Emotional awareness. 4) Population size. 5) Physiological necessity 6) System level links (ecology) No order is intended in the above list. You might think of some to add yourself. As for carts and horses, yours are in the appropriate sequence if 1) there are meaningful differences between the races and 2) difference is inherently threatening. I am not buying either of them. I understand that bigotry is rationalized by focusing on differences and perceiving threat in those differences. I submit that that is irrational. It seems to me that anyone who could be so respectful of a black widow spider has a good soul and would not succumb to that. I'm confused here. I grew up as a white minority on a black mission station in southern Africa. I'm quite at home in foreign cultures. I enjoy greatly the diversity that racial and ethnic cultures bring to the planet. I lament the wars and ill treatment people bring on each other using such issues. I see no reason to deny that real differences do exist. I'd happily share the planet with a species that was smarter than my own, if such existed. In fact, I'd argue that if only several species of approximately equal intelligence to us had evolved, we would have a much more advanced morality now. Unfortunately it did not happen that way. But we are making progress. But the only way to disabuse me of it is to tell me what differences there are that I'm missing/denying I did list one, regarding sports. What is your opinion on that?