On Moral Authorities

[Edwardo Piet]

There's no absolute proof of what is best for our well being... but some things are certainly more likely to be better for our well being than others. I can safely say that having all my wildest hopes and dreams fulfilled and being physically and mentally healthy is better for my well being than having my nob chopped off, my face kicked in, and not only never fulfilling any of my wildest dreams but not having even my most basic desires fulfilled and instead being given the minimum food, water and sleep just to live in a constant state of despair, exhaustion, anxiety and all-round agony and torture.

I can't prove absolutely that the former would be better for my well-being than the latter... but science doesn't deal with absolute proof anyway. There's no absolute proof of what food is good for us or bad for us either, but there's still a clear difference between food and poison.

It's true that someone can say "Why should anyone give a fuck about suffering or well being?" but we should react to those people the same way we react to the theists who don't give a fuck about evidence.



To draw an analogy here... if someone doesn't give a fuck about compassion, what compassion can you show them to convince them that they ought to care about compassion for the suffering of others?

If someone doesn't care about compassion or suffering then the conversation should be over just as much as someone who doesn't care about evidence or logic. Sure, we can't prove that compassion ought to be valued... but we can't prove that science, evidence or logic ought to be valued either. But those who don't value compassion, science, evidence or logic can bugger off.