The Amoral Universe
A reflection on the “Peterson-Harris debates on Truth” written in 2017
There is a higher truth than the human truth, truth that is independent of humans, that precedes humans; otherwise (in the words of JBP), everything “was false” or “not true enough” before humans arrived or emerged.
The Universe doesn’t have moral values because those might be completely different for the creatures that experience it, their level of consciousness, motivations and other biological or psychological traits, and those can be infinite or very numerous… and they can share their existences at the same time in different places.
How to morally judge color, from the lethal consequences for a light-intolerant organism or from the vital perspective of a bee ?
In order to establish communication with an extraterrestrial civilization we need to dominate those aspects of the universe that are independent of the human experience and values, otherwise is probably impossible to establish an information exchange system, a common language between different intelligent species. Independently of our intention or goals, we will probably agree with a visiting extraterrestrial civilization on the size, weight and properties of a Hydrogen Atom; only these types of universal truths will allow to establish a common ground of understanding with other beings (even among ourselves) that possess a higher or lower understanding of experience or existence. Amen Carl Sagan.
Dolphins seem to be very intelligent, but as of right now we only seem to have “fish” as our only communication method, “fish” seem to be their only motivation, the only practical physical reference to their “morals and values”. We would probably agree that everything a dolphin does is to get “fish”, as that is the tool we use to create a domestication and control over their behavior, yet many moral considerations arise of the fact that we posses and use that tool (that seems to be their very own ultimate goal) for our own purposes; in that case “fish” might or might not be intrinsically a good thing for Dolphins, that would depend on the values and motivations of the subject that is assessing their situation, and even individual dolphins (some might prefer granted food in exchange for servitude, others might not, and probably most would choose a balance); that case exemplifies the implicit risk of embedding moral judgement on physical reality and the infinite complexity that it creates, making obvious that you can not attach moral weight to physical objects or reality.
The same gun that kills a child can kill a child killer, the motivation of the original inventor or the final user does not necessarily define the character of the object, although there might be many cases where invention, technological and scientific development are not born out of malice, many negative applications come out of them (Haber–Bosch process for example), and the other way around, and both ways too.
The fact that we can articulate knowledge in a way that can destroy or own existence doesn’t make that knowledge less true, in fact probably more true, and, in the fashion of the very own Jordan B Peterson I would argue that a meta-human-morality arise from understanding the serious dangers that reside in our scientific enterprise, that scientific knowledge and the existential risks that are derived from it, are equivalent to knowing and understanding the dark part of our own personalities and that (in his own words) is the only way to stop being naive and become a fully capable and functional specie and individuals.
Using also the example of Sam Harris, a laboratory manipulating and playing with Smallpox could kill the whole human specie, yet we could also picture a scenario where a Bioweapon derived from this knowledge could protect us from an invading extraterrestrial civilization, or even a case where Smallpox would be the cure for a disease that is killing a visiting extraterrestrial civilization.
As a conclusion I would argue that morality-free knowledge is a divine quality, that that is the risk we have to assume in our quest for immortality, that it might be an implicit quality of existence… even in mythology gods are destroyed or demoted.
It seems to be a constant in the universe that nothing is constant, nothing is granted or totally safe.
Avoiding knowledge than can kill us… will kill us, and the infinite universe doesn’t give a shit about we mere humans, yet “1” will always and anywhere be a prime number ( I disagree with it not being considered so) because it has no morals attached to it… “1” and “0” are the universal exchange currency, is not casual that they also represent “true” and “false” and is not casual that using only those, we seem to be able to fully simulate our own reality and even create other universes…
…that’s my take.
