Re: Dyson (Was: Paths to Uploading)

Alejandro Dubrovsky (
Mon, 11 Jan 1999 16:14:15 +1000 (GMT+1000)

On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Randall Randall wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:
> >On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Terry Donaghe wrote:
> >But even if it is most of you (us?) it is still not objective. I think it
> <snip>
> >people). So according to objective morality, do these people not exist?
> >are they explainable as noise in the data?
> Objectivity does not imply universal agreement. Evolution is no less an
> objective fact because there are sizable populations who violently
> disagree that it is true. While I do not consider myself an objectivist,
> I do not believe that objectivity can be established by vote.
But evolution exists independent of what humans think (barring any silent tree-felling kind of arguments), while morality is solely a creation of this activity (unless a god exists, but i don't think that is what Terry Donaghe was suggesting), therefore suggesting an objective morality is suggesting that this human creation has some features which are independent of the specific human and common to all.
Alejandro Dubrovsky