|
|
|
|
|
by JumpCrisscross
571 days ago
|
|
> even your metaethics must have some axiomatic basis Sure. But that base is, for the present time, being set by humans. Not acknowledging that is naïve. > ultimately it comes down to human privilege, just not at a specific part How do you define human privilege? When I've seen the term, it's been framed against non-human life. It thus doesn't make sense to assert human privilege against non-living entities. When one does, one isn't asserting a human privilege, but a privilege of the living. (Or more accurately, of the sentient. Those with agency.) |
|
This itself requires explaining too. Axioms can't be justified except by axioms outside of their system, so you're still relying on something to place humans on top. It is something you may agree with, but I am not bound to it for my basic beliefs.
> When one does, one isn't asserting a human privilege, but a privilege of the living.
Sure. I am against any arguments put forth by living beings for lunar development in the way that humans have right now. I was under the impression that we all implicitly use "human" for succintness; do you personally see a difference in how another sapient being might make the argument, all else being equal?