Objective values are non-arbitrary and can't be contradicted. It's possible to not IQ-optimize and also not die.
-
-
-
Replying to @Outsideness
It's pretty clear that most organisms see decreasing returns on more intelligence. Mammals, at least.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
No animal unresponsive to verbal imperatives can possibly be relevant to the question.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @Alrenous
Because the question is about the plausibility of categorical imperatives.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Outsideness
The imperatives appear after the IQ-maximizing forces, though. It is the force that justifies the imperative.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
Replying to @Outsideness
Yes. Which is why they should apply to nonverbal life, even though the Kantianism only applies to verbal life.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Alrenous
Applies in the sense that intelligent life ultimately dominates non-intelligent life.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Dream apes end up as specimens in the lab.
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.