Isn't the reasonable response to imperfect knowledge to rationally (or scientifically) search for more knowledge, or to work on improving the accuracy of the knowledge you do have?
Why do you think a reasonable response to imperfect knowledge is to assume that there exists some divine being for which there is no reasonable evidence of existence? In other words, your response to imperfect knowledge is to make your knowledge even more imperfect. One of my assumptions is that any step towards more perfect knowledge is useful. That is sort of a corollary from my wanting to progress towards a more Culture like society. But apparently, Nick, you don't want to always strive closer to perfect knowledge, you feel better when you add some comforting belief which is actually imperfect, poor quality knowledge. As for your questions, I can't really answer them because they seem to be all based on false premises. I don't recall anyone here posting that their morals were purely logical. I certainly didn't. Mine are subjective. But I have a lot of suggestive evidence that my moral system is a good one for the type of progress that I'd like to see. Did you do a web search or read the link that I posted about Tit-for-Tat strategies in iterated (repeated) game theory problems? In Axelrod's prisoner's dilemma competition, a Tit-for-Tat strategy (basically, with no information, tend to cooperate, otherwise do what your opponent did on the last turn) or slight variations therein consistently won the competitions. This strategy reminds me a lot of the Golden Rule. So, it seems that something like the Golden Rule could be favored by evolution. Is that proof of the superiority of such a moral system? Of course not. But it is highly suggestive to me that much of the reason that humans have come to dominate their environment is because such behaviors evolved in humans. Another way of saying "coming to dominate one's environment" is "progress". So far, such a strategy seems to me to be the best for promoting the most efficient progress. But if I learn of a better strategy, I would certainly be open to changing my own morals. In contrast to this, Dan has posted that his morals come from god. A mystical being for which Dan has no rational evidence of existence, nor any reliable evidence for its goals. Even if such a being did exist, which in itself is an extremely dubious assumption (if I started going around telling everyone that invisible pink unicorns told me how to behave, how long do you think I could stay out of a mental hospital?), without having rational evidence of the goals of this being, how does one know whether one should follow the decreed morals of this mystical being? So, on one hand, we have a moral system based on a stated subjective goal and some suggestive experimental and historical evidence. There is certainly no proof or certainty here, but there is some amount of rationality and empiricism, and also willingness to accept new evidence. On the other hand, we have people who, out of the infinite number of possibilities for which we have absolutely no rational evidence, randomly choose one and say IT EXISTS. It simply does. I can't explain how I know it exists, and you cannot perform any scientific experiment to test its existence, BUT I KNOW IT EXISTS. No evidence can convince me otherwise. Which is the more reasonable system? Don't get me wrong, I can understand why people feel the need for a powerful, all-knowing, benevolent figure in a world of uncertainty. When we are children, our parents fulfill this role. When our race was young, and knowledge and communication were much less, god may have usefully served this role. But children eventually realize that their parents are not all-knowing and all-powerful, and children eventually strike out on their own. I think humanity should have long ago outgrown the need for such unreasonable beliefs -- it is time for humans to start setting their own goals and living their own lives. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
