From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!mcsun!uknet!mucs!mccuts!fs1.mcc.ac.uk!zlsiida Tue May 12 15:49:36 EDT 1992
Article 5473 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!mcsun!uknet!mucs!mccuts!fs1.mcc.ac.uk!zlsiida
>From: zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: re re ai failures
Message-ID: <zlsiida.185@fs1.mcc.ac.uk>
Date: 7 May 92 15:44:14 GMT
References: <zlsiida.112@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> <1992May1.193141.24350@psych.toronto.edu> <zlsiida.144@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> <1992May6.171350.3830@psych.toronto.edu>
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre
Lines: 118

First off, I was saying killing is OK, so why bother trying to pin down just
what circumstances I do kill in?  Your argument seems to be implying that I
said killing is wrong....
Now, let's go-

In article <1992May6.171350.3830@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.
toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:

>In article <zlsiida.144@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd) writes:
>>In article <1992May1.193141.24350@psych.toronto.edu> christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
>>
>>>In article <zlsiida.112@fs1.mcc.ac.uk> zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd) writes:
>>>>I don't kill anything myself except for food or clothing or
>>>>in self protection.  
>>
>>>Really???!!!! Do you breathe (in things)? Do you walk (on things)?
>>               --------------------------  -----------------------
>>               No intentionality           Not if I see them
>>  
>It's not killing if there's no intentionality?! How 'bout drunk dirvers?
Didn't say it wasn't killing, just letting you know I don't kill totally
indiscriminately.

>>>Do you occasionally get insects in your eye?
>>                         -------------------
>>The insect dies because it hits me, not because I hit it.

>A matter of opinion, I'm sure.
Not at all - if we both have cars and we crash, and mine wasn't moving at 
all (and was sensibly placed on the road), how is it my fault?

>>
>> Do you sometimes slap them
>>                  ----------
>>>dead just because they're annoying -- say, mosquitos? 
>> ----
>>Only if they actually attack
>>
>This counts as self-defense?
Yes.  Taking action in defence of the self when attacked is self-defense.
Actually I'd kill a lot more insects if I could be bothered to chase them.


>>Do you buy silly
>>>little trinkets from foreign countries where working conditions contribute
>>>to the early death of the workers? 
>>              -------------------
>>No
>>
>I doubt it. Take a look at the labels on your clothes and canned good once.
Clothes and canned goods are 'silly little trinkets'?  I'll put some Tshirts
on my wall and a few cans of sweetcorn on the mantelpiece as soon as I get 
home!
 
>>
>>Do you ever buy flowers? Did you know
>>>that in the greenhouses in which carnations are grown the workers are sprayed
>>>with pesticides daily? 
>>
>>I personally have never forced anybody to work in a pesticide-loaded 
>>environment, and I would be more than happy to pay extra or accept the 
>>occasional bug in my flowers.
>>
>Perhaps you better take a look at the systems of which you're a part.
>Do you drink coffee? Tea? Eat chocolate, or any sugar product?
>Hitler didn't "personally" shove Jews into ovens. Does that make him
>innocent?
I had some interesting mail from someone else about how pesticides aren't
as bad as most people think...
I use my purchasing power to encourage systems which are less environmentally
damaging.  But remember I'm the one who says killing is OK, so why try to
pin me down on these details?  It's the central 'killing is OK' you should 
attack.  I don't think the Hitler analogy is apt: he knew, he wanted it, 
and of course he was guilty.  Unless I take time away from relatively more
important (to me) things, I don't know.  I don't want it, and where I can I
discourage it (see above).  Any guilt is minimal and indirect.
 
>>> Do you buy tuna, the catching of which leads to the
>>>death of hundreds of thousands of dolphins and whales annually? Do you ever
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>How many?  I buy the stuff labelled 'dolphin-friendly'.  
>>
>>>fly in planes, which kill millions of birds annually?
>>                      ----------------------
>>I suppose it could be millions, lots of planes about.  Only flown twice, and
>>one of those was a 4 seater where I'd have noticed a bird strike.
>>
>Clever answers. I see you righteousness is well defended. Dangerous.
Nothing cleverer than the truth.  Or more dangerous.


>>
>>No because I don't think it was self-righteousness
>>And in any case, as I said, a lot of nonsense gets talked about when it is
>>or isn't OK to kill.  Regardless of moral or ethical codes or laws I think
>>you'll find history shows that killing happens whenever it's expedient.

>But, course, you're never involved. And you're not being self-righteous.
>I see. :-(
Sure I'm involved, more than I'd like to be most of the time.
I'll look up self-righteous when I get home just to be sure whether I am
or not (in this context).



I'm away next week so we may have to drop this thread.
Getting a bit silly anyway.
My only real point is : The conditions under which killing is OK are 
culturally determined, not absolute.  Personally I have no trouble
with switching off an AI construct which sticks at 3yr old level IQ.
And nor will most people, IMHO, as the construct is not the same species
as us.



+--Great Quotes of our Time---------------------------------------------+
| It is not the policy of this department to backstitch corrective code |
+----------------------------------------R J Collins, compilers, UMRCC--+


