The standard reply here is that duh, values are a property of agents. I'm allowed to have values of my own and strive for things, even if the huge burning blobs of hydrogen in the sky don't share the same goals as me. The prospect of increasing entropy and astrophysical annihilation isn't enough to make me melt and die right now. Obligatory quote from HP:MOR:
"There is no justice in the laws of Nature, Headmaster, no term for fairness in the equations of motion. The universe is neither evil, nor good, it simply does not care. The stars don't care, or the Sun, or the sky. But they don't have to! We care! There is light in the world, and it is us!"
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
cousin_it and Vladimir_Nesov's replies are good answers; at the risk of being redundant, I'll take this point by point.
The above is factually correct.
The phrases "cosmic significance" and "absolute validity" are confused notions. They don't actually refer to anything in the world. For more on this kind of thing you will want to read the Reductionism Sequence.
Our efforts would be "ultimately futile" if we were doomed to never achieve our goals, to never satisfy any of our values. If the only things we valued were things like "living for an infinite amount of time", then yes, the heat death of the universe would make all our efforts futile. But if we value things that only require finite resources, like "getting a good night's sleep tonight", then no, our efforts are not a priori futile.
Egotism is an idea, not a thing, so it's meaningless to say that it exists or doesn't exist. You could say "Only egoists exist", but that would be false. You could also say "In the limit of perfect information and perfect rationality, all humans would be egoists", and I believe that's also false. Certainly nothing you've said implies that it's true.
The Metaethics Sequence directly addresses and dissolves the idea that everything seems to be meaningless because there is no objective, universally compelling morality. But the Reductionism Sequence should be read first.
Wow fantastic thank you for this excellent reply. Just out of curiosity, is there any question this "cult of rationality" doesn't have a "sequence" or a ready answer for? ;)