Non-Relativistic Ethics
AEC Episode 06 — The two fundamental principles
Can we know what's good independently of particular situations? Yes. There are two principles — symmetry and continuity — that emerge from the very nature of choice itself and apply everywhere.
The Foundation
Choice lives in the relationship between self and other. To understand good choice, we need to understand comparison itself. Six concepts are required for any comparison:
Any language about goodness will use these concepts. Any principle of effective choice will be expressed in these terms.
Relative vs. Non-Relativistic
Relative Ethics
"What's right depends on the situation and who you are."
This isn't really principle — it's an indication that there are no principles.
Non-Relativistic Ethics
"What's right emerges from the nature of choice itself, independent of particulars."
Context-independent. Applicable everywhere.
"If we don't find something like that, it's a free-for-all. Somewhere along the way, to know what's right in a situation, we must connect to something deeper, independent of situation."
Truth, Beauty, Goodness
These three go together. They're mutually dependent:
- An ugly truth feels wrong
- Beautiful theories are more likely to be true
- Goodness has both truth and beauty associated with it
The ground on which this tripod stands must have truth, beauty, and goodness intrinsically.
The Two Principles
Examples:
- Golden Rule: Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you (same treatment, different direction)
- Categorical Imperative: Do only what would work if everyone did it (works for me = works for all)
- Equality before law: Same treatment regardless of race, age, creed
- Friendship: Friend today = friend tomorrow; friend here = friend there
- Communication: Message sent = message received (same content across subjective/objective contexts)
Violations: Unfairness, hypocrisy, taking advantage of asymmetries, psychopathy, crimes against fairness
In practice: Proportionality between change of context and change of content. Small changes in context should produce small changes in content — not abrupt jumps.
- Gradualness: Give the other person time to respond to change
- No abrupt shifts: Stranger → intense life-threatening encounter = discontinuity
- Channel preservation: The communication channel must exist and remain connected
Violations: War, rape, weapons, anything creating abrupt discontinuity, loss of life, involuntary creation of life
How They Relate
💡 Continuity enables Symmetry
Without continuity, there's no channel. No channel = no message = no possibility of symmetric transmission.
Continuity is so fundamental that we perceive through it. We notice symmetry violations as content, but continuity is the context through which we see at all.
The communication channel between self and world needs:
- Continuity: The channel exists, remains connected
- Symmetry: What goes in = what comes out
Application
When unpacking what went wrong in a relationship or situation, ask:
- Was there a symmetry violation?
- Was content preserved across different contexts?
- Did I treat them as I'd want to be treated?
- Would this work if everyone did it?
- Was there a continuity violation?
- Was there an abrupt discontinuity?
- Did things change too fast for response?
- Did the channel get severed?
Summary
- Non-relativistic ethics: Principles that apply independent of particular situations
- Six concepts of comparison: Sameness/difference, content/context, subject/object
- Symmetry: Sameness of content where difference of context (fairness, golden rule)
- Continuity: Proportional change, no abrupt discontinuities (gradualness, preservation)
- Both are required: Continuity enables the channel; symmetry preserves the message
"The principle of symmetry and the principle of continuity is the language within which we would express the deepest, most concise, most complete notions of ethics. Point blank, period."
📜 Full Transcript
[Transcript available in full episode recording]