From: Bantz, Michael S \(UMC-Student\) (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Mar 03 2005 - 09:51:34 MST
I'm impressed with what your doing, and I think approaches like this are as vital as engineering experimentation or bottom-up techniques. My interpretation of what you are saying about Morality vs Rationality is that Rationaltiy involves analyzing how an external input creates a different external output whereas Morality analyzes how an external (or maybe internal as well) input creates an external output (decision making). Basically, does an situatio-action include that Mind or not. Is this what you are getting at (atleast, in part)? Hofstader (I highly reccomend GEB if you havn't looked at it) talks about isomorphisms (and recognizing them) being essential to meaning and intelligence in a way similiar to your use of metaphors.
I think the next question is, what basic moral assumptions will be versatile enough to allow for continuous mental evolution? Also, at what point does self-awareness come into play? Oddly enough, I remember a exact incident, February 20 of my fifteenth year, when I suddenly decided that I had some kind of internal essence which I could manipulate in way drastically different from the manipulation of my body, and that was the begining of my inquiry into philosophy and ethics. It seems as though before that point I was merely a system of extremely complicated input-outputs. If Dinner-time then come to table, then place knapkin on lap, then say prayer, then use silverware to eat, ask for seconds, say thank you, etc. Now it seems that the most important input for for my actions is what the output of my Mind just was.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:50 MDT