| ... |
... |
@@ -1,29
+1,0 @@ |
| 1 |
|
-====A priori reasoning is impossible so the only epistemologically sound basis for morality is experience. ==== |
| 2 |
|
-**Schwartz:^^ ^^** |
| 3 |
|
-The empirical support |
| 4 |
|
-AND |
| 5 |
|
-an empirical claim. |
| 6 |
|
-====And, pleasure is inherently good. ==== |
| 7 |
|
-**Sinhababu : ** |
| 8 |
|
-We can form |
| 9 |
|
-AND |
| 10 |
|
- affairs we are in. |
| 11 |
|
-====logical consistency implies we value the happiness of others. ==== |
| 12 |
|
-**Sayre-McCord ** |
| 13 |
|
-According to the second |
| 14 |
|
-AND |
| 15 |
|
-of all the rest. |
| 16 |
|
-Thus, the standard is maximizing expected well-being. |
| 17 |
|
-====The definition of ought implies utilitarianism.==== |
| 18 |
|
-**Harris^^ ^^:** |
| 19 |
|
-But this notion |
| 20 |
|
-AND |
| 21 |
|
-and human well-being. |
| 22 |
|
-A. Topical Education |
| 23 |
|
-B. Ground |
| 24 |
|
- |
| 25 |
|
-====If there is a risk of ethical uncertainty, we should always prioritize survival of the human race to ensure the future. This is an independent weighing claim.==== |
| 26 |
|
-**Bostrom ~~Nick Bostrom. Faculty of Philosophy and Oxford Martin School University of Oxford. "Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority." Global Policy (2012)~~** |
| 27 |
|
-These reflections on moral uncertainty suggest an alternative, complementary way of looking at existential |
| 28 |
|
-AND |
| 29 |
|
-of value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe. |