Quote: 'Anything that inhibits, impedes, or prevents this movement toward the Ultimate Complexity is evil. The wonderful thing about this definition of good and evil is that it is both objective and universally acceptable.’
-
-
Replying to @TeubenRoald @0x49fa98
Read a bit, like the same definition as in Asimov's "The Last Question" http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html … Also it's hard to go from moral principles such as that to something like "evil occurred at Rotherham"
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @simpolism @0x49fa98
Yeah it's similar! What makes that bridge of reasoning "hard"?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Maybe "hard" is not what you mean. Asking because the quoted character was crime lord in Bombay. While profiting off other things he banished the porn industry on moral principle. He likely would describe the Rotherham perpetrators as evil w/o difficulty.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @simpolism @0x49fa98
Rotherham was kind of complex. What's your take on Richard Ramirez?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TeubenRoald @0x49fa98
I mostly don't see how to get from "universal complexity" to "human life and relations"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @simpolism @0x49fa98
Something like: Humans are the highest expression of natural complexity, take that as good, so human life and relations should be maintained. Not saying it's precise, but it's good enough to recognize "degeneracy" like child sex abuse.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TeubenRoald @simpolism
I don’t know if this works, since I could build Rube Goldberg machines of arbitrary complexity, more complex than any human, and then in this model, they would have more moral value than humans
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @0x49fa98 @simpolism
That's part of why it's imprecise, because complexity is not standardized. How many humans equal one of your Rube Goldberg's? n/a
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
It's for more mundane morality. The guy who applied it was a mob boss. For him, selling passports to war criminals was justified because someone would have done anyway it so better it be him - the guy who bans porn while he's got the power.
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.