TimS comments on Nonperson Predicates - Less Wrong

28 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 27 December 2008 01:47AM

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

Comments (162)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: TimS 18 November 2011 07:51:49PM 0 points [-]

Okay, but my own view on the matter is that "blicket" is a continuum -- most properties of creatures, both physical and mental, are continuums after all. Creatures probably range from having zero blickets (amoebas) to a couple blickets (reptiles) to lots of blickets (apes, dolphins) to us (the current maximum of blickets).

How is this use of the term different from the term "moral concern"? I'm trying to talk about creatures we give sufficient moral weight that the type of justifications for their treatment change. Killing cows takes different (and lesser) justification than killing humans.

I never said it would lack blicket. Blicket would make me want to help a creature achieve its aspirations, which in this context it would mean helping the AI to die.

Is it fair to say that you don't think it makes any moral difference whether you made the AI or found it instead?