From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!uunet!psinntp!norton!brian Fri Jan 31 10:27:31 EST 1992
Article 3317 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!aunro!ukma!wupost!uunet!psinntp!norton!brian
>From: brian@norton.com (Brian Yoder)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Strong AI and Panpsychism
Message-ID: <1992Jan30.024733.6129@norton.com>
Date: 30 Jan 92 02:47:33 GMT
References: <1992Jan28.165322.25735@colorado.edu>
Organization: Symantec / Peter Norton
Lines: 22

tesar@tigger.Colorado.EDU (Bruce Tesar) writes:

>     You could start by explaining why I should treat *you* as more worthy
> of ethical consideration than a rock, given that you are conscious and
> the rock is not. What is so important about being conscious?

That is simple.  If I strike a rock with a hammer the result is that there
will be a dent in the rock (or two half-rocks).  If I hit you with a hammer
you will likely hit me with one, or get your friends to, or at least will
refuse to trade with me in the future, and if I give you evidence that I am
about to hit you with a hammer, you may beat me to the punch.  In any event, 
the consequences of hitting you with a hammer are worse for me than doing the
same to a rock.  If everything about you were the same except that you were
an unconscious vegetable, the ethical situation would be the same as with
the rock.  Only conscious entities can plan ahead, retaliate, or choose to
trade or not.  That's what gives rise to the difference.

-- 
-- Brian K. Yoder (brian@norton.com) - Q: What do you get when you cross     --
-- Peter Norton Computing Group      -    Apple & IBM?                       --
-- Symantec Corporation              - A: IBM.                               --
--


