Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MouseBean t1_j5q05x0 wrote

Reply to comment by bac5665 in On Whether “Personhood” is a Normative or Descriptive Concept by ADefiniteDescription

>Because those cognitive abilities are what determine ethical duties owed to that elephant...It must be emotional and intellectual capacity that creates moral weight.

No they don't. Ethics has nothing to do with cognitive ability. Moral value is a property of systems, not individuals, and the ethical significance of individuals comes from their role in maintaining this systemic value. Ethical significance has to do with relationships, not experiences. And all living things have these relationships, every living thing has ancestors, every living thing reproduces, every living thing eats, and every living thing is eaten.

Humans or other animals are not any more significant in this regard than other organisms.

There are plenty of other alternatives to suffering-based morality that are not divine command theory.

2

AhmedF t1_j5q1r1g wrote

> Ethics has nothing to do with cognitive ability

I don't fully disagree with you, but it is related - eg vegans who eat bivalves because their lack of a nervous system means they don't feel pain.

We do make distinction in how "advanced" an organism is.

2

Idrialite t1_j5qld82 wrote

>they don't feel pain.

This is why, not their lack of cognitive ability.

2

bac5665 t1_j5rj6n8 wrote

Pain is a cognitive ability. One of many.

3

AhmedF t1_j5qo616 wrote

People who think gotchas are some form of intelligence are exhausting.

Fine - it's not pain. Are you saying any creature with any kind of cognitive ability is equivalent to you? Are ants equal to pets equal to dolphins equal to humans?

1