Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate

Re:Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate by davrosthedalek on Monday April 22, 2019 @11:20AM (#19719558)

I'm not so sure if human being should have the attribute of "worth" (I formulate it like this because "have no worth" has a different meaning). If they do, you can make ugly calculations: It's worth to kill 300 PAX to save 1000s in the skyscraper the plane is going to fly into. It's worth to kill one prisoner in interrogation because he knows where his partner might have the hostage (or two?).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate by Nav_Panel on Monday April 22, 2019 @11:26AM (#19719610)

Worth doesn't have to be absolute nor quantifiable. To use a mathematics analogy, you can have an ordered set without addition and subtraction, and it could even be roughly ordered so you can't tell the difference between two adjacent elements.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Neuroscientist Larry Cahill on the ‘neurosexism’ debate by bluGill on Monday April 22, 2019 @03:49PM (#19722204)

Worth doesn't even have to be one measure. In math you can have two different ordering functions which give different results on the same input.

[ Parent | on HN ]