Comment

the same can be said of DNA. this is a completely arbitrary standard, and you would be better served to embrace that than pretending it’s somehow objective.

source

Sort:hotnew top

oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I’m not saying it is objective, I’m saying it’s not arbitrary.

If my dna was isolated in a test tube and it could experience things then I would also care about what it experiences. There isn’t any evidence I’m aware of that that’s the case. Dna is the instructions and tool to build the sentient being, not the sentient being itself. So no, the same couldn’t be said of dna. Extrapolating from how much I care about what I experience, I think it’s reasonable to care about what ** experience

source
- commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  
  I’m not saying it is objective, I’m saying it’s not arbitrary.
  
  this can’t be true. it’s self-contradictory.
  
  source
  - oshitwaddup@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    ok, taboo the word arbitrary. What do you mean when you say arbitrary?
    
    source
    commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    I mean there is no objective reason to set the standard at sentience any more than any other standard.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments