Random numbers are complex. The tit-for-tat strategy is simple.
Increasing those other features you mentioned may tend to cause an increase
in complexity, but that doesn't make complexity valuable in and of itself,
nor a good indicator of the others.
This is particularly true of moral systems. A moral system, if it is to
be more than a personal set of habits, must be something that a community
can agree to follow. Simplicity is valuable in a moral system because
the easier it is to follow a moral system, the easier it is to keep it
effective by drawing a clear dividing line between those who follow it
and those who reject it. Also, the more rules a system has, the harder it
is to achieve a consensus about it.
Vegetarianism, unless accompanied by a clear principle for dividing
nonhuman lifeforms into those whose rights we respect and those we don't,
risks blurring the boundaries in a way that makes it seem easier to
for people to decide that that boundary is just a matter of personal
choice.
-- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Peter McCluskey | pcm@rahul.net | Has anyone used http://crit.org http://www.rahul.net/pcm | to comment on your web pages?