Supplement: On the other hand, if ants or bees would evolve to intelligent species, I find it likely, that with intelligence would come individualism.
Jon, List,
Minimum suffering can be achieved with two different principles, the categorical imperative, and the utilitaristic principle. In real situations, applying both often leads to contradiction. So, to get from is to ought, there has to be an agreement, which of both principles is the more essential one. I think, this agreement would be due to human species history. Humans are rather individualists, every life counts, no one wants to be treated for a means, but rather for an end, so I think, that the categorical imperative is more essential, comers first, and merely is moderated by the utilitaristic principle. If ants or bees, who are much more collectivistic than individulistic, would evolve to intelligent species, I guess for them the utilitaristic principle would be more essential.
Best,
Helmut
05. November 2020 um 18:40 Uhr
"Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net>
wrote:
"Jon Awbrey" <jawb...@att.net>
wrote:
Cf: Problems In Philosophy • 9
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/11/05/problems-in-philosophy-9/
Many good questions from Richard Saunders ...
Re: FB | Ecology Of Systems Thinking
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ecologyofsystemsthinking/permalink/3460818670663919/
::: Richard Saunders
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ecologyofsystemsthinking/permalink/3460818670663919/?comment_id=3461102183968901
RS:
Hume's is/ought dichotomy: are these as Gould said “non-overlapping
magisteria” or are they concentric domains? Is a science of aesthetics
at the core? If memory serves it seems like that was what Wittgenstein
suggested at the end of “Tractatus”. In “The Moral Landscape”, Harris
narrows the aesthetic focus to a distinction between the minimum and
maximum suffering of all sentient beings. Maximum suffering is bad
or ugly and minimum suffering is good or beautiful. The relationship
of conduct to result is the subject of consequentialism, isn't it?
Isn't that also the subject of science?
JA: I know a lot of people see a cut and dried dichotomy here
and conventional wit says you can't derive Ought from Is.
My tracings of the boundaries though tend to find them
recursively entangled.
RS:
Recursively entangled is a nice phrase, like the the chicken and the egg.
But I'm still wondering about the catch-22. On what general axiom is
aesthetics/ethics/logic based? Harris suggests it's minimizing net
suffering. (That doesn't imply the elimination of suffering,
because some suffering has a net positive result.)
JA: I got no absolutes here. I have my personal aesthetic, but
a personal aesthetic is the moral equivalent of a religion,
and folks are pretty free about that.
JA: I'll have more to say about my personal aesthetic … all in good time.
Resources
=========
• Prospects for Inquiry Driven Systems
https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems
• Logic, Ethics, Aesthetics
https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems#Logic.2C_Ethics.2C_Aesthetics
• Wikiversity :
• Descriptive Science
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Descriptive_science
• Normative Science
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Normative_science
Regards,
Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
http://inquiryintoinquiry.com/2020/11/05/problems-in-philosophy-9/
Many good questions from Richard Saunders ...
Re: FB | Ecology Of Systems Thinking
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ecologyofsystemsthinking/permalink/3460818670663919/
::: Richard Saunders
https://www.facebook.com/groups/ecologyofsystemsthinking/permalink/3460818670663919/?comment_id=3461102183968901
RS:
Hume's is/ought dichotomy: are these as Gould said “non-overlapping
magisteria” or are they concentric domains? Is a science of aesthetics
at the core? If memory serves it seems like that was what Wittgenstein
suggested at the end of “Tractatus”. In “The Moral Landscape”, Harris
narrows the aesthetic focus to a distinction between the minimum and
maximum suffering of all sentient beings. Maximum suffering is bad
or ugly and minimum suffering is good or beautiful. The relationship
of conduct to result is the subject of consequentialism, isn't it?
Isn't that also the subject of science?
JA: I know a lot of people see a cut and dried dichotomy here
and conventional wit says you can't derive Ought from Is.
My tracings of the boundaries though tend to find them
recursively entangled.
RS:
Recursively entangled is a nice phrase, like the the chicken and the egg.
But I'm still wondering about the catch-22. On what general axiom is
aesthetics/ethics/logic based? Harris suggests it's minimizing net
suffering. (That doesn't imply the elimination of suffering,
because some suffering has a net positive result.)
JA: I got no absolutes here. I have my personal aesthetic, but
a personal aesthetic is the moral equivalent of a religion,
and folks are pretty free about that.
JA: I'll have more to say about my personal aesthetic … all in good time.
Resources
=========
• Prospects for Inquiry Driven Systems
https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems
• Logic, Ethics, Aesthetics
https://oeis.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey/Prospects_for_Inquiry_Driven_Systems#Logic.2C_Ethics.2C_Aesthetics
• Wikiversity :
• Descriptive Science
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Descriptive_science
• Normative Science
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Normative_science
Regards,
Jon
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu .
► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ► PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . ► To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message NOT to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with no subject, and with the sole line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm . ► PEIRCE-L is owned by THE PEIRCE GROUP; moderated by Gary Richmond; and co-managed by him and Ben Udell.
