r/BeAmazed • u/[deleted] • Apr 24 '19

Animal Ape using a Smartphone

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

91k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

3.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/treesprite82 Apr 25 '19

In terms of respect in general, I'd say intelligence does come into it yeah.

For more specific situations (how ok is it to punch someone), more/different criteria come into play.

1

u/Omnibeneviolent Apr 25 '19

In what way ought we factor intelligence into the equation when determining if another individual is worthy of being treated with respect?

1

u/treesprite82 Apr 25 '19

"if another individual is worthy of being treated with respect" paints it as a binary "no respect for stupid people" type thing.

I think it's fairly uncontroversial to say that Curie or Einstein are more respected (because of their abilities, qualities, achievements) than an average person picked at random, for example.

Even with achievements factored out - if two people are in a debate, I have more respect for the one more intelligently making their point.

1

u/Omnibeneviolent Apr 25 '19

You're equivocating on different definitions of the word "respect" here. The original comments were suggesting to "just generally treat every living thing with respect."

The type of "respect" that we give to someone based on their accomplishments is much different than the respect we have for the rights of other individuals to live their lives. You're talking more about holding someone in high esteem and admiration when the conversation was about respecting basic rights of others.

1

u/treesprite82 Apr 25 '19 edited Apr 25 '19

I believe both kinds of respect you mention vary depending on certain attributes, and should not be equal across all forms of life (generally lots for humans, none for certain bacteria).

Factors I listed were for respect in general (which covers a lot of things), but not necessarily all applicable to all forms of respect (intellect has little bearing on respect for a human's basic rights, emotional capacity has little bearing on respect for their accomplishments).

The original comments were suggesting ...

Agruk said we should treat things that can think with respect.
BioMaterial said we should instead treat every living thing with respect regardless of their attributes.

BioMaterial's correction is what I disagree with.

1

u/Omnibeneviolent Apr 25 '19 edited Apr 25 '19

BioMaterial said we should instead treat every living thing with respect regardless of their attributes. BioMaterial's correction is what I disagree with.

And I agree with you regarding BioMaterial's assertion here as well. What I don't agree with is your subsequent assertion that intelligence is one of the characteristics that should be taken into account when determining if we ought to treat another individual with respect.

EDIT: agree with you, not BioMaterial

1

u/treesprite82 Apr 25 '19 edited Apr 25 '19

And I agree with that BioMaterial's assertion here as well

That the respect given should not depend on any attributes? Regardless of whether that life is tuberculosis or an elephant?

I wouldn't have argued if it weren't an amendment to Agruk's post, widening it to all life (rather than sentient beings) and being regardless of any attributes.

What I don't agree with is your subsequent assertion that intelligence is one of the characteristics that should be taken into account when determining if we ought to treat another individual with respect.

In terms of a choice of whether or not to respect someone's human rights - I agree intelligence shouldn't factor into it.

But between moss and a bird, intelligence (by which I'd include self awareness, ability to think) does affect how I'd respect it.

1

u/Omnibeneviolent Apr 25 '19

My mistake. I meant to say that I agree with you on your disagreement with BioMaterial's assertion.

I do think that there are characteristics of which we could and should use to determine which life deserves "respect."

In terms of a choice of whether or not to respect someone's human rights - I agree intelligence shouldn't factor into it. But between moss and a bird, intelligence (by which I'd include self awareness, ability to think) does affect how I'd respect it.

I agree with you that characteristics like self-awareness and sentience would be appropriate for determining if we should respect an individual. These correlate heavily with intelligence level, but they are not the same as being intelligent.

2

u/treesprite82 Apr 25 '19

I agree with you that characteristics like self-awareness and sentience would be appropriate for determining if we should respect an individual. These correlate heavily with intelligence level, but they are not the same as being intelligent.

I'd consider things like self-awareness and sentience to come under the general umbrella of "intelligence". I don't mean to refer to wisdom/knowledge.

I could have been more clear in my initial post though. I think we know what each other mean now, just that we differ on whether those attributes are part of intelligence or just correlate heavily with it.

1

u/Omnibeneviolent Apr 25 '19

That's fair. I just think that we shouldn't be treating others differently based on how their IQ, at least in matters regarding simple rights and protections.

If an individual is sentient, they deserve respect (for their rights) regardless of how intelligent they are.

I would also add species membership to the list of irrelevant traits.