| 1 |
[q]It doesn't have to be God; it doesn't even have to have general intelligence. A computer could be considered a mind mostly free from certain failings of the human mind, such as arithmetic errors. And thus, if we plug in 2134234389 * 2834927371165 to the computer, we get 6050399485857709993185, and we trust this more than a calculation done by hand.[/q]
|
1 |
[q]It doesn't have to be God; it doesn't even have to have general intelligence. A computer could be considered a mind mostly free from certain failings of the human mind, such as arithmetic errors. And thus, if we plug in 2134234389 * 2834927371165 to the computer, we get 6050399485857709993185, and we trust this more than a calculation done by hand.[/q]
|
| 2 |
\n
|
2 |
\n
|
| 3 |
This one is easy. What maximizes group utility will not necessarily maximize your utility. In fact maximizing group utility could very well see your organs harvested.
|
3 |
This one is easy. What maximizes group utility will not necessarily maximize your utility. In fact maximizing group utility could very well see your organs harvested.
|
| 4 |
\n
|
4 |
\n
|
| 5 |
One of the classical examples of the trolley problem
|
5 |
One of the classical examples of the trolley problem
|
| 6 |
\n
|
6 |
\n
|
| 7 |
[q]A brilliant transplant surgeon has five patients, each in need of a different organ, each of whom will die without that organ. Unfortunately, there are no organs available to perform any of these five transplant operations. A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. In the course of doing the checkup, the doctor discovers that his organs are compatible with all five of his dying patients. Suppose further that if the young man were to disappear, no one would suspect the doctor. Do you support the morality of the doctor to kill that tourist and provide his healthy organs to those five dying people and save their lives?[/q]
|
7 |
[q]A brilliant transplant surgeon has five patients, each in need of a different organ, each of whom will die without that organ. Unfortunately, there are no organs available to perform any of these five transplant operations. A healthy young traveler, just passing through the city the doctor works in, comes in for a routine checkup. In the course of doing the checkup, the doctor discovers that his organs are compatible with all five of his dying patients. Suppose further that if the young man were to disappear, no one would suspect the doctor. Do you support the morality of the doctor to kill that tourist and provide his healthy organs to those five dying people and save their lives?[/q]
|
| 8 |
\n
|
8 |
\n
|
| 9 |
This random act of murder in no way benefits you. Unlike the previous example, I made with the car and bus, where a cooperative Nash equilibrium could increase your odds of living. In fact it hurts you because you are now afraid of going to the doctor and society starts falling apart. Or in my case of signing up as an organ donor.
|
9 |
This random act of murder in no way benefits you. Unlike the previous example, I made with the car and bus, where a cooperative Nash equilibrium could increase your odds of living. In fact it hurts you because you are now afraid of going to the doctor and society starts falling apart. Or in my case of signing up as an organ donor.
|
| 10 |
\n
|
10 |
\n
|
| 11 |
\n
|
11 |
\n
|
| 12 |
Basically right and wrong needs to be based at least to a degree in individual utility. Ultimately you can only trust people who have good moral character and derive utility from doing good. Universalist moral philosophers hate this idea and call it Egoism. Economist love this idea and call it rational self interest.
|
12 |
Basically right and wrong needs to be based at least to a degree in individual utility. Ultimately you can only trust people who have good moral character and derive utility from doing good. Universalist moral philosophers hate this idea and call it Egoism. Economist love this idea and call it rational self interest.
|
| 13 |
\n
|
13 |
\n
|
| 14 |
Moral
philosophy
based
communism
failed
while
market
driven
capitalism
succeeded.
“Great
Idea.
Wrong
Species.
”
(
E.
O.
Wilson)
(
leading
sociobiologist
and
expert
on
ants)
|
14 |
Moral
philosophy
based
communism
failed
while
market
driven
capitalism
succeeded.
“Wonderful
theory,
wrong
species.
”
(
E.
O.
Wilson)
(
leading
sociobiologist
and
expert
on
ants)
|
everything matters