Storm
By and large, most people will agree that they are opposed to slavery - they find slavery to be immoral and inhumane. Because of this, it is rare to find anyone defending slavery on any level or in any form.
Perhaps there is one aspect of slavery which merits closer consideration, however: what if someone wants to be a slave and is happy being a slave? Should a person have the ability to sell themselves voluntarily into slavery if they claim that that is what makes them happiest? Is slavery really so wrong that we should intervene and disrupt a person' s happiness because we object so strongly to it?
Most of the time we are inclined to allow a person to do something they desire if they say it makes them happy and if it doesn' t hurt anyone else. Why? Because generally, we assume that people should be allowed to pursue their own happiness and that they are the best judges of what will make them happy.
After all, who are you or I to say that what a person desires and what they say will make them happy is wrong? Who are we to assert our moral objections over someone else' s happiness? But maybe that isn' t such a bizarre position after all - perhaps it is quite legitimate to argue that, as with opinions, a person can be mistaken about their desires and can be mistaken about what would really make them happy.
Because our beliefs about the world can be mistaken, our desires can be founded on incorrect information and mistaken conclusions. Because our beliefs about the world can be corrected, our desires can also be corrected. In reality, his beliefs may be wrong and so might his desire for slavery.
Irrelevant on a practical level because no one would every really claim that they want to be a genuine slave? In some ways this objection may be legitimate, but technological advances may override it some day. Our ability to manipulate the human genome at least raises the theoretical possibility of creating humans with an innate desire to be subservient slaves. Assuming that such humans actually were created, should they be allowed to sell themselves into slavery?
On a more realistic level is the possibility of creating a human-level Artificial Intelligence which might otherwise deserve basic civil rights, but which has been programmed to enjoy working as a slave of human beings. Should such AI machines be treated with dignity and accorded basic rights, or should they be treated as actual slaves because that is what they have been programmed to want?
Perhaps there is one aspect of slavery which merits closer consideration, however: what if someone wants to be a slave and is happy being a slave? Should a person have the ability to sell themselves voluntarily into slavery if they claim that that is what makes them happiest? Is slavery really so wrong that we should intervene and disrupt a person' s happiness because we object so strongly to it?
Most of the time we are inclined to allow a person to do something they desire if they say it makes them happy and if it doesn' t hurt anyone else. Why? Because generally, we assume that people should be allowed to pursue their own happiness and that they are the best judges of what will make them happy.
After all, who are you or I to say that what a person desires and what they say will make them happy is wrong? Who are we to assert our moral objections over someone else' s happiness? But maybe that isn' t such a bizarre position after all - perhaps it is quite legitimate to argue that, as with opinions, a person can be mistaken about their desires and can be mistaken about what would really make them happy.
Because our beliefs about the world can be mistaken, our desires can be founded on incorrect information and mistaken conclusions. Because our beliefs about the world can be corrected, our desires can also be corrected. In reality, his beliefs may be wrong and so might his desire for slavery.
Irrelevant on a practical level because no one would every really claim that they want to be a genuine slave? In some ways this objection may be legitimate, but technological advances may override it some day. Our ability to manipulate the human genome at least raises the theoretical possibility of creating humans with an innate desire to be subservient slaves. Assuming that such humans actually were created, should they be allowed to sell themselves into slavery?
On a more realistic level is the possibility of creating a human-level Artificial Intelligence which might otherwise deserve basic civil rights, but which has been programmed to enjoy working as a slave of human beings. Should such AI machines be treated with dignity and accorded basic rights, or should they be treated as actual slaves because that is what they have been programmed to want?