Member Of Species

@MemberOfSpecies The key point I think you might still be missing: Fragmentation is the SUBSTITUTE for universalist argumentation.

@MemberOfSpecies "How do we make a good universalist case for fragmentation" is getting it wrong (and will always fail, because entropy).

@UF_blog Or in the sense of "if someone dies or suffers, it's morally undesirable regardless of the person's family/nation/thede/etc"?

@MemberOfSpecies If the enemy suffers or dies it's undesirable? No one thinks that, unless anomalous religious fanatics.

@MemberOfSpecies "The universe is bad because animals eat each other" -- there are actually people who think such thoughts have some value.

@UF_blog I'm sort of one of those people, so maybe our disagreement runs deeper than I previously thought.

@MemberOfSpecies I respect your consistency (but don't want you writing the laws I live under).

@UF_blog Badness of animals eating each other is in the pain of being eaten, but not clear if animals are conscious in the relevant sense.