[tehchromic]

It's a well meaning article. My first thought is that it's generated by AI in the service of some moderate yet far reaching religious org.

"Finding our intrinsic values is no trivial task, but something that forces us to stare into the core of our humanity."

I think it misses a critical topical conclusion which is that "intrinsic values" means little or nothing to many, and many folks are fairly incapable of competently doing the kind of contemplative meditating required to arrive at some set of rules like that, and so they look to others.

And here's the crux of the missed point:

To really resonate with our intrinsic values, we need to drop the myth that a rational economic system exists, and build one with the value of present and future human life explicitly built in.

We already have a massive framework for understanding individual intrinsic values in terms of the sanctity of human life and that's the great mystery religions that have birth to our modern age. What's needed now is a planetary ethos where intrinsic human value is put in the proper context of the ecological reality of the biological and geological systems and processes that sustain us. Building that culture requires myth and magic, but also is an intensely rational project. There is really no way around it, and any philosophical text intended to shift the cultural landscape is incomplete without it.

[jcelerier]

> first thought is that it's generated by AI

We're in the Yosemite park bear era of AI: there is considerable overlap between the capabilities of the most intelligent AI and the most stupid humans

... And that's very generous to humans

[openfuture]

Please join us on matrix! Starting from datalisp.is.

[pas]

> sanctity of human life

what's so sacrosanct about life? life is common, many argue too common. (see the overpopulation hysteria.)

I'd argue there are better things that we should hold dear, like empathy and cooperation, the resilience of getting up after devastating events, our ability to cooperate in even the most abstract frameworks.

[krapp]

>I'd argue there are better things that we should hold dear, like empathy and cooperation, the resilience of getting up after devastating events, our ability to cooperate in even the most abstract frameworks.

You can't hold those things dear without first believing in the sanctity of human life. If human life has no value above the value of human endeavor neither do empathy, cooperation or resilience, human life becomes just another resource to exploit and consume.

I disagree religion is the only possible framework through which this can be expressed, however. It's entirely possible to hold human life sacrosanct in its own liminal terms without invoking the supernatural.

[sifar]

You do realize none of them would exist without life.

[mensetmanusman]

In the rational context of the universe, life is impossibly rare.