In a message dated 99-02-26 13:50:47 EST, you write:
<<
What about this shot at an objective morality?
Metamorality: Morality is by definition good. For morality to exist, there has to be something. Morality cannot exist in nothing. Before the big bang there was no universe, thus no morality.
I think I disagree. Before there was sentient life, there was no morality.
Morality makes no sense (as a system to support our decision-making) without
a self-reflective ability to choose between yes and no, should and should
not.
Life which does not have this ability is simply following its blind genetic
coding.
Morality: Anything that makes the universe exist longer and fights the entropy is moral. The highest form of morality is whatever increases extropy.
But isn't this an arbitrary definition (ie., non-objective?). Why should we think that it is a good definition? How does it help us predict human behavior?
Couldn't it be as simple as that?
Things are never that simple :-)
Regards,
Thanks for great thinking,
Eric
>>
Sounds interesting, Eric. Please show me how this would proscribe murder and
theft.
Adrian