Physical systems that behave differently from you usually do not have factual or moral disagreements with you. Only a highly specialized subset of systems, when they do something different from you, should lead you to infer their explicit internal representation of moral arguments that could potentially lead you to change your mind about what you should do.
Adults do well to remember this applies to the physical systems called infants and children.
Today's post, Hot Air Doesn't Disagree was originally published on 16 August 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):
"Disagreement" between rabbits and foxes is sheer anthropomorphism. Rocks and hot air don't disagree, even though one decreases in elevation and one increases in elevation.
Discuss the post here (rather than in the comments to the original post).
This post is part of the Rerunning the Sequences series, where we'll be going through Eliezer Yudkowsky's old posts in order so that people who are interested can (re-)read and discuss them. The previous post was The Bedrock of Morality: Arbitrary?, and you can use the sequence_reruns tag or rss feed to follow the rest of the series.
Sequence reruns are a community-driven effort. You can participate by re-reading the sequence post, discussing it here, posting the next day's sequence reruns post, or summarizing forthcoming articles on the wiki. Go here for more details, or to have meta discussions about the Rerunning the Sequences series.