Raw LLM Responses

It is beneficial to separate ideas of what is from what should be. I’d agree with the author of the article that what *is* is that people assign moral worth according to positive personal relationships with others - people, AI, even inanimate objects like a favorite sweater. The trouble is that this is so subjective - what has moral worth to me may not to someone else, which makes it hard to form rules and laws that will govern everybody. Metzinger and (Crane, was it?) were arguing from the standpoint of what *should* *be*. Much easier to make a law once you’ve agreed on a definition, but as pointed out, those definitions are darn tricky.