Vaniver comments on Arguments Against Speciesism - Less Wrong

28 Post author: Lukas_Gloor 28 July 2013 06:24PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (474)
Tags: speciesism ethics

Comments (474)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vaniver 29 July 2013 01:59:39AM 7 points [-]

If we use cognitive enhancements on animals, we can turn them into highly intelligent, self-aware beings as well.

And then arguments A through E will not argue for treating the enhanced animals differently from humans.

And the argument from potentiality would also prohibit abortion or experimentation on embryos.

It would make the difference between abortion and infanticide small. It does seem to me that the arguments for allowing abortion but not allowing infanticide are weak and the most convincing one hinges on legal convenience.

I was thinking about including the argument from potentiality, but then I didn't because the post is already long and because I didn't want to make it look like I was just "knocking down a very weak argument or two".

I think this is a hazard for any "Arguments against X" post; the reason X is controversial is generally because there are many arguments on both sides, and an argument that seems strong to one person seems weak to another.

Comment author: threewestwinds 30 July 2013 01:29:37AM *  1 point [-]

What level of "potential" is required here? A human baby has a certain amount of potential to reach whatever threshold you're comparing it against - if it's fed, kept warm, not killed, etc. A pig also has a certain level of potential - if we tweak its genetics.

If we develop AI, then any given pile of sand has just as much potential to reach "human level" as an infant. I would be amused if improved engineering knowledge gave beaches moral weight (though not completely opposed to the idea).

Your proposed category - "can develop to contain morally relevant quantity X" - tends to fail along similar edge cases as whatever morally relevant quality it's replacing.

Comment author: Vaniver 30 July 2013 01:57:14AM 1 point [-]

What level of "potential" is required here? A human baby has a certain amount of potential to reach whatever threshold you're comparing it against - if it's fed, kept warm, not killed, etc. A pig also has a certain level of potential - if we tweak its genetics.

I have given a gradualist answer to every question related to this topic, and unsurprisingly I will not veer from that here. The value of the potential is proportional to the difficulty involved in realizing that potential, as the value of oil in the ground depends on what lies between you and it.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit