• taladar@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Goals and priorities might differ a lot between an ant and a human but not so much between two humans. At least not enough to not get at least a few rules for behavior.

    • WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Just because its easy to get a bunch of humans to agree say murder is wrong, doesn’t mean you can call that objective.

      The reason humans and ants differ so much in morality is because of the difference in the subjective experience of being a person versus being an ant.

      If morality is subjective, you’d expect creatures with similar subjective experiences to agree with each other.

      You’d expect one subjective blob of rules to conform to human biology/sociology and a separate blob of subjective rules to apply to antkind with no real way to interface between the two.

      • jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 minutes ago

        and you base that expectation on what?

        hopes and dreams?

        The reason humans and ants differ so much in morality is because of the difference in the subjective experience of being a person versus being an ant.

        this is predicated on a false assumption. you don’t know ants and humans experience different subjective experiences, you just strongly suspect it. knowing =/= suspecting. which is why you follow this illogic down to an incorrect conclusion of your “expectation.”

        the greatest challenge of our age is dispelling the victorian myth that knowledge of the real world is untouchable to us. the distinction between you and other does exist, but we are not locked out of the world. we can deduce real facts about things outside our perception.