From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul> Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2013 15:17:59 -0000 Archived: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 19:57:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence >From: John Donaldson <John.Donaldson.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 22:26:32 +0000 >Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence <snip> >That doesn't settle the realism/anti-realism debate in ethics, >of course; but even anti-realists about ethics acknowledge that >the default position is realism <snip >anti-realists face the burden of argument, and we can assume >moral realism is true until it is proven otherwise. That isn't >to say that it can't be proven otherwise (or that it can), >rather that if you want to make claims about the likelihood of >amoral or evil super-AIs based on a rejection of moral realism >then you better be prepared to argue for it, at length and with >sophistication. Hello John, Nope, as you can see my position is that 'morality' +/or 'ethics' are evolutionary outcomes which have developed (because they work) to increase a species chances of survival. It's as simple as that. As you might also see, a corollary is that a different species will necessarily have different morals/ethics, which are maybe not even understood by themselves - just as most of us don't seem to understand the meaning, origin or purpose of our own 'morals'. Cheers Ray D Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp