From: hal@finney.org
Date: Wed Nov 20 2002 - 15:47:32 MST
Discuss
From: "Hal Finney" <hal@finney.org>
X-Mailer: YaBB
[Sent via web interface]
Here's how I would like to solve the question of what ethical system
is best. Let there be a multitude of communities, each with its
own moral code. Let people join whatever community they wish,
which requires them to agree to follow and be bound by that
community's code. Then let these communities compete. Those
communities which thrive will be the ones with a moral code which
is most in accordance with reality.
Now, there are a number of complications with this plan. One is
whether communities can set up codes which limit the circumstances
under which people can leave. I think they can, as long as everyone
agrees to be bound by that code upon entry. Another question is
how to deal with newly created people (children, software, etc.).
Once they reach a certain level of maturity and rationality they
must choose their community. This requires all communities to
allow children to leave at the age of maturity, an unfortunate and
hard to enforce meta-level code constraint.
I wrote of communities "competing". is this economic competition?
Or does it include racing to claim new resources? Even open warfare?
And where are these communities? Are they towns, cities, countries?
Are they planets in some kind of galactic civilization? Perhaps
they are voluntary collectives in some virtual environment, like
the Polises in Egan's Diaspora?
The answer will depend upon the technology and environment faced
by society as it evolves. But ideally the communities are relatively
independent, so that people can have most of their interactions
among others who have voluntarily agreed to adopt the same moral
codes; and again ideally, they would compete peacefully. In
practice, violence has been a part of all of human history, and
that may be true in the future. Warfare between communities may
be a reality, and we may have to accept that this will be a form
of competition in the future as well.
The goal of this approach is to bypass the question of what ethical
system is right, by allowing people freedom to make their own
decisions on this matter. It attempts to give people the maximum
degree possible of choice and options in terms of trying out
different ethical systems. And it gives visibility into the effects
of different systems, to let people see for themselves how well
the different approaches will work, and to help them make better
decisions. This can be seen as speeding up a natural process of
evolution where unsuccessful ethical systems get eliminated while
successful ones thrive.
In the end, whether this approach or any other is followed, I think
that we will continue to evolve towards a limited number of systems
that work. I think my approach gets us there more quickly, while
giving people the maximum freedom possible. At the same time, I
admit that it gives people more flexibility to make bad decisions,
and all the experimentation that I would promote might lead to some
very unhappy communities. These failures do a service by being an
instructive example to others, but it is at a cost in human happiness.
Still I think it is a worthwhile tradeoff because if we don't make
mistakes, we can't learn from them.
Hal
---- This message was posted by Hal Finney to the Extropians 2002 board on ExI BBS. <http://www.extropy.org/bbs/index.php?board=61;action=display;threadid=53774>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:16 MST