RE: Proving What We Already "Know"
July 22, 2022 at 9:57 pm
(This post was last modified: July 22, 2022 at 10:01 pm by bennyboy.)
-Edit-
Where's the edit button these days?
I should amend the above by saying that something can happen that a sentient observer WOULD call "bad," whether they are actually there to witness the bad change of state. But for it to be "bad," someone somewhere has to exist that either a) already thinks that type of state change is "bad," or b) if they encountered it, would think that type of state change is "bad."
That harm is not intrinsic to a nonsentient thing whose state changes should be clear if you and I interpret the same state change differently. Let's say you think an increase in humans is bad (too many fucking people, get off my lawn!), and I think it's good (more brains = bigger bell curve = eventual genius scientist who saves humanity). In that context, is a new pregnancy good or bad?
Where's the edit button these days?
I should amend the above by saying that something can happen that a sentient observer WOULD call "bad," whether they are actually there to witness the bad change of state. But for it to be "bad," someone somewhere has to exist that either a) already thinks that type of state change is "bad," or b) if they encountered it, would think that type of state change is "bad."
That harm is not intrinsic to a nonsentient thing whose state changes should be clear if you and I interpret the same state change differently. Let's say you think an increase in humans is bad (too many fucking people, get off my lawn!), and I think it's good (more brains = bigger bell curve = eventual genius scientist who saves humanity). In that context, is a new pregnancy good or bad?