Re: Infanticide and Extropy

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Thu May 09 2002 - 22:09:43 MDT


Rafal writes

> Let me note for the benefit of persons perusing our
> conversation, that I emphatically disagree with you
> on the desirability of legalizing infanticide, and
> my continued participation in this thread does not
> indicate an even theoretical willingness to consider
> such action, merely curiosity about the reasoning
> you might adduce on your behalf.

Okay, when the List of Names is made, and the names
are named, don't worry, you're safe! Seriously, why
in the world would you be afraid (while arguing
against something) that you will be taken to be
a proponent? This really strikes me as though
you have some familiarity with Stalinism, e.g.,
guilt through association.

> Specifically, since this is the extropian list, I
> wonder which of the Extropian Principles can you
> use as moral grounding for your deadly ideas.

I, for one, do not need to seek authority in Extropian
principles or in any other doctrine for what I choose
to think or believe. It's still a free country. I think.
I'm so amazed that you would ask such a thing.

> Remember, the contents of the archives will be
> around, to haunt Extropians for a long time.

I have been Warned. Come the day when the Great Leader
calls all to account, indeed my goose is cooked. (But
then it has been, practically forever, anyway.)

>> Well, Rafal, the gulf between us is very great. It's so
>> great that I hope you don't mind some personal questions.
>> (1) What is your cultural heritage? (2) Have you ever
>> heard, in childhood perhaps, the saying "Beware the man
>> coming to do you a favor" or something similar? (It's
>> quite customary in the U.S., I thought.) (3) Have you
>> ever heard of the acronym MYOB?

### 1) Silesian, a perfect explanation for my propensity to
### force abstention from infanticide on others, whether
### they like it or not

I'm not really that familiar with Silesian culture. ;-)
Okay it's a very old part of eastern Germany, I believe
but I guess that you're not being serious here. Did you
grow up there, or here?

>> Under no tradition that I can think of does "moral behavior"
>> include the clauses that you state. It *never* includes a
>> willingness to force it on others. "Moral" and "ethical"
>> behavior *always* applies to one in terms of one's restraint
>> of one's own actions.

### This is totally at odds with moral reasoning as expounded
### by almost all philosophers, from Plato onwards, until the
### advent of moral relativism. Are you a moral relativist?

First, I totally disagree! I still can't believe that you can
quote any well-known philosopher (except maybe Plato himself,
the fascist) who explicitly states that the majority should
force its morality on the minority. No, philosophers are always
discussing what *should* be accepted by people as moral. Right?

As for being a moral relativist, I don't know. I'm an ethical
relativist, and so I suppose that's close. Here is my brand
of moral relativism, if that's what it is: THERE ARE NO GOD-
GIVEN LAWS REGULATING HUMAN MORALITY, NOR CAN ANY SUCH BE
FOUND IN SCIENCE OR NATURE.

But I have to shy away from the term moral relativist: it's often
used to describe the "anything goes" school. For example, some
people do something that I or you think abominable, and some
moral relativist sap says, "oh, it's okay, because by *their*
standards it is". Such a moral relativist might excuse the
practice in India whereby a wife (alive) is burned along with
her deceased husband. You and I are equally outraged, and equally
condemn the action (though you might want to invade India or
something, and I wouldn't).

>> You're perhaps thinking of the traditionally enshrined
>> dictates against murder, theft, and so on. These arise
>> quite naturally from other reasons, and have little to
>> do with morality or ethics, it happens.

### This is indeed so puzzling as to be bizarre - murder
### not unethical?

Sorry for not being clearer: the *origin* of these has
little to do with their being unethical. As a counter-
example, lying is universally condemned as unethical, yet
we (wisely!) do not have laws against it. To repeat:
the laws arose evolutionarily, not necessarily because
some behavior was deemed unethical.

I'll try to deal with your other points in another thread.

Lee



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:57 MST