Comment on Fish have heart too.
oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 9 months agoOnce you go to a deep enough layer I think you’re right. But, the one subjective thing my argument rests on is that you care about your own experience. Anyone who flinches away from touching a hot stove because it hurts cares about their experience at least a little. The next step is recognizing that from an objective view, there’s no reason to think your subjective experience is any more important than anyone elses (subjectively there is).
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
we are going to, once again, disagree on the relevant definition of “anyone”.
oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 9 months ago
That seems to bother you. Let’s taboo the word. When I say “someone”, “anyone”, “person”, etc, I’m referring to a sentient being, a subject of experience, an experiencer, one who is experiencing. Now you can interpret what I’m saying better, do you disagree with the actual points I’m making?
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 months ago
yes, I do: sentience is too broad a category, and not actually relevant to most people. if we are talking about people, then all of your statements are fine. but I don’t agree that these axioms are or should be applicable to, sat, mosquitos . or mice. or dogs or cats. or fish. or livestock.
oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz 9 months ago
Why is sentience too broad? afaik all humans are sentient, otherwise we’d be philosophical zombies (or there would be p-zombies among us)