(July 19, 2022 at 6:25 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Without motivated sentience you may not have observers to see what is good or is bad and give a shit about it, but that doesn't tell you whether or not harm, for example, is present. Ostensibly, a thing can be harmed even when there are no motivated sentient witnesses present.No, I don't think it can.
What IS harm? It's a bad change of state. But what makes any change of state intrinsically bad without a sentient observer that prefers one state to another?
Maybe you could give examples of such a change, because I cannot think of any at all.