Russ Abbott emitted this, circa 09-06-19 02:30 PM: > Nick said that I think people would be better off if they believed in an > inner life. That's not my position. My position is that the existence of > an inner life seems to me to the only viable foundation for ethics,
I think it's possible to found ethics on biology (without denying the existence of "higher level" phenomena), without a unitary "inner self". I have two (somewhat glib) referencable reasons to think this: 1) mirror neurons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_neurons and 2) various associative patterns in the body (particularly brain/cns): Bullies May Enjoy Seeing Others In Pain http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081107071816.htm Without being too reductionist, I think the reasons we avoid "unacceptable" behavior is simply because we have physiological structures in our bodies that _tend_ to steer us away from such behaviors. Over time or distance, by virtue of inter-individual variation, the acceptability of actions (as observed in others or potentiated in ourselves) may vary. Now, if you think of ethics or morals as what one _ought_ to do, you have the additional problem of capturing what is [un]acceptable to the body. And for that, we have to go back to the concept of "higher level constructs". To go back to Mary, the color-blind scientist, a subjective experience of color is _not_ a higher level construct. It's merely a different way to _slice_ the data she already had (at least within epsilon of her individual boundary with the environment). The light that impinges on Mary's boundary is no different. All the same data is there. Mary just manages to slice it in a different way after the color-blindness is gone. It's a new _compression_ of the data (a lossy one at that). It's a new aspect from which to examine the data. So, it's not a higher level construct at all. It's a reduction of the rich data set into a smaller aspect. To be clear, subjective color perception is a lossy compression of the data available. Given that, to extrapolate willy-nilly, all _feelings_ are compressions of body states. E.g. "feeling nauseous" is the slicing (reduction, compression) of a milieu of physiological data into a unitary aspect with a name. That's all any "feeling" is including love, hunger, the urge to pee, etc. OK. Now go back to the foundation of ethics. A foundation for ethical behavior is to identify, recognize, maintain the accuracy and precision of, and act upon feelings, the self-somatosensory data available to the body. He who is unethical or immoral is guilty of not paying attention to, and acting in discordance to, the state of his own body. He who is ethical and moral pays close attention to, and acts according to, the state of his own body. He who is amoral ignores the state of his body. [grin] Now I'll crawl back under my rock. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://agent-based-modeling.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
