Philosophy

4 readers

1 users here now

Welcome to Kbin's philosophy community! a place where you can share and discuss your thoughts on the big questions of life. Whether you are a professional philosopher, a student, or just a curious person, you can find here a friendly and stimulating community of people who love to explore the mysteries of existence. Feel free to post your own questions, opinions, arguments, memes, or links to interesting philosophical content. Just remember to follow the rules and be respectful of others. Have fun and enjoy the conversation!

founded 1 year ago

In A Universe With Only 1 Person, Can That Person Be Immoral? (kbin.social)

submitted 1 year ago by Lenguador@kbin.social to c/philosophy@kbin.social

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

As a thought experiment, consider a reality with a single human. There are no other humans, animals, or anything of that nature. Not in the past, present, or future.
The human has access to a a machine which can create anything, except for living beings.

The main question:

Can this person perform any immoral action?

What about symbolic harm?
2. What if the person creates a human child-body with no brain and does terrible things to it? (rape, defecate in its mouth, eat it, etc)
3. What if the child-body is identical to the person as a child and
a) The person does not know this
b) The person does know this

What about self-harm?
4. What if the person refuses to eat? They desperately want to eat, but refuse, until they die.
a) Because they want to die
b) Because they decided to do so arbitrarily
c) Because they want to suffer
d) Because they want to lose weight
5. What if the person cuts off a limb and regrets it later?

Finally:
6. Is there another question which ought to be added?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Lenguador@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I would argue that, yes, the person could behave immorally. Actions which harm the person, without benefit, are immoral.

Morality for the person is based on the metric by which the person measures happiness/fulfillment/success.
All actions which do not affect that metric are amoral.
Actions which improve the metric are moral.
Actions which reduce the metric are immoral.

Specific answers:

.1. Yes
2. No
3.
a) No
b) Only if it causes psychological harm
4.
a) No
b) Yes
c) Depends if more self-actualization/fulfillment is gained than the suffering, as judged by the person
d) No
5. Yes
6. Perfect questions, wouldn't change a thing

[–] luka_aleksic@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

While I'm no objectivist, an idea I like from Ayn Rand's "The Objectivist Ethics" is that fulfillment is the mind's way of telling us we are living in accordance with our values, and morality is the question of what those values should be and why. Viewed through this lens, answering in terms of fulfillment would then be circular reasoning.

So the question is: is it right to derive fulfillment at all, from actions such as self-harm or abusing an effigy in unspeakable ways? Do the answers to these questions change when moving between our own universe and this lonely thought experiment one? If so, how and why?