Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasper84  I will try make another iteration of the ethics-axiom idea
...
Edit: Note that the axiom is more a goal to set, not a axiom at all. |
I'm going to add an axiom to my list: there is somehow a universal standard of "good," which is external to myself.
We can axiomatize goals, I think. We make some axiom that says what is good in general for creatures, if you like; then we make another axiom that says something like, "I should try to increase 'good.'"
I'm getting myself into semantic difficulties here, but basically I'm saying there is a universal "good." There is also, "good" restricted to individuals--wants or feelings or needs or something, being met, vaguely. Finally, pursuing such individual good is universally good and right.
Is this explanation making sense?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasper84 Maybe a good approach is to give the creature the freedom to do what it wants, and assume that it will appease itself. (this is not passive, some one without food does not have the freedom to eat, giving him food is non-passive.) |
I like this formulation. Then, spoiling a child is also not giving the child freedom, because spoiling the child actually hampers them in the long run.
Also it could be argued that killing a suicidal friend hampers, rather than increases his freedom; and that helping the friend past the problem does the opposite.
Interesting viewpoint.