X-Message-Number: 21211
From: 
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 21:29:08 EST
Subject: ends & means

--part1_16f.1af971df.2b86e8f4_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Speaking against Dave Pizer's "consequentialism," Rick Potvin writes in part:


> The ends/means  idea is hugely
> problematic. 

Just about everything is problematic. Of course the ends justify the 
means--except when they don't. A little white lie is good, a big black lie is 
bad, and a medium-sized gray lie is messy--at the first level of 
investigation.

The bigger problem is untangling "ethics" and "morality" and motivation or 
values. If your self is truly confined to your skull, then the only rational 
values are based on the effects of decisions on the future contents of your 
skull. You want to maximize future feel-good, after figuring out what that 
means and how you measure it and predict it.

A book-length explanation will make it just a little clearer.   

Robert Ettinger

--part1_16f.1af971df.2b86e8f4_boundary

 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21211