Page 2 of 2 [ 18 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

bjornflanagan
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 35
Location: Sioux Falls, SD

27 Apr 2017, 6:33 pm

Dear_one wrote:

This is a variation on the "trolley car problem" - If you throw a switch, someone dies, but if you don't five people die. It has to be decided to legally cover the asses of the people programming robot cars, so there's lots of discussion these days.

As to the algorithm, the value of life is already quantified by insurance. The least amount of damages is the best response to legal liability. The most reasonable answer is to place liability on the one who chooses to use the vehicle with said algorithm; I'm sure there will be waivers embedded into the purchase to free the builder from this liability. Is this a moral question, though? Nope, just one of damages and monetary value.


_________________
"A very common error: Having the courage of one's convictions; rather, it should be having the courage to attack one's own convictions."

***Friedrich Nietzsche***


HelloWorld314
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 19 Mar 2017
Gender: Female
Posts: 93

27 Apr 2017, 8:57 pm

C2V wrote:
Ethics have shifted and changed a lot throughout time and culture, and continue to do so into the future.


^^^Thank you. This sums up my point. I feel like the so-called ethics are simply social conventions agreed by the mainstream population of the current generation. They are not necessarily righteous, they are just rules which current generations of humans come up with which they think will serve humankind in the long run. Thus the ethics are limited by the ignorance of the current generations just like the ethics 1000 years ago were limited by the ignorance of that generation. Therefore I feel the need to question every commonly accepted ethical rule as they are not necessarily the best solutions and they can be potentially improved, however, for most people unethical is unethical and doing the unethical is just purely wrong, period.

For example, I am purely curious what human flesh tastes like, and I obviously am not gonna kill anyone for it. I suggested that people could have the option of selling their body to be eaten in exchange for money for their leftover families after they pass away, and this seemed to hit many people's hot spots. Another example, I told people that if I were to have children, I would search for the best quality sperm donor (attractive, athletic, intelligent, emotionally stable, mentally healthy) on sperm bank since I am a lesbian anyway, and some people seemed to really get offended by that. There are many other similar incidents likes these...However, I fail to see good logical solutions of why they are "wrong" except the so called ethics.

And thanks to all for the discussion, they are fun to read!


_________________
Cheers,
HelloWorld314

p.s. English is not my native language, please correct me if I have made any mistakes. I would really appreciate it. Thanks:)


raw83472
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

Joined: 28 Apr 2017
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 37
Location: Florida

28 Apr 2017, 4:10 pm

Morality is subjective to our ability to empathize and reason. You're talking about the reasoning side of things.