Can physics prove what we ought to do? (The is–ought problem)
A calculation can describe how an act affects people without deciding that those effects should matter. OPH's ethical interpretation adds that affected observers' suffering and agency constrain an acceptable arrangement. Given that commitment, an accounting of consequences can distinguish repairing harm from exporting it. The value premise must stay visible. A group might achieve agreement by excluding a victim, and a mismatch score could fall when an inconvenient record is erased. Neither is justice merely because the number improves. The essays therefore defend dissent as a channel for correcting an inadequate settlement. Their ethical proposal uses the physical picture while adding a moral criterion; a convergence theorem alone proves no obligation to maximize agreement.
See also Is there an objective right and wrong?, If everyone agrees on something, does that make it true?, What is evil?
Also in Chapter 40: Does It Feel Like Anything, and What Is Left to Decide?, Chapter 41: What Does a Repaired World Look Like?.
This answer comes from OPH, Observer Patch Holography. OPH is a rigorous, consistent and complete description of the unified, self-creating computational Universe we inhabit. Its consistency is machine-checked: the fixed point at its core is constructed explicitly, and a theory with a model contains no contradiction.
To understand OPH and check every step yourself, start with the free book Reverse Engineering Reality. It builds the theory from the ground up, and the OPH Notebook answers your questions while you read.
read the free bookask the notebookor ask sage:read chapter 39: Why Is a Bacterium Freer Than an Atom?watch a universe make its own particles