Not really. It is the aim of sentients. To increase wellbeing and decrease suffering. https://twitter.com/leiferik47/status/979421497193201664 …
-
-
It;s not a premise. It's just evolution.
-
Okay, agree with you talking about aims of sentient beings in evolutionary terms (barring the exceptions which then die out). I thought the discussion was on morality.
-
Yes, but this is why our morality is based on this.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
When linking something to morality, bringing an "ought" from an "is" is dangerous. I do agree with you that generally, and for the majority of the population, self preservation and thriving is important.
-
I disagree strongly with that but can't be bothered to have the is/ought argument again. If sentients don't like to suffer and we care about their wellbeing, reducing suffering is inevitable conclusion. And this is instinctive to us.
-
No probs. It could stem from the different way we use particular words, in this case "ought". I don't disagree with anything in the second part of your tweet. No harm done.
-
Course not! :)
-
You can even disagree with me and that would still be OK.
-
I didn't realise you had a big"is/ought" discussion it I wouldn't have started. Thanks for your time on this.
-
It went on for two days and involved much acrimony and heatedness. It is OK to talk to me about stuff! You're one of my earliest tweeps and I like talking to you.
-
I knew you before you was famous

- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.