The wrongness of killing persons is explained primarily in terms of the moral standing conferred by autonomy, independently of welfare.

Entities in the same semantic neighborhood but without a typed relation to this one — candidates for new edges or unrecognized duplicates.

• the wrongness of killing persons is explained primarily in terms of the moral standing conferred by autonomy, as opposed to by considerations of non-maleficence.quote0.967
  Central statement of the autonomy-based account of the wrongness of killing.
• Wrongness of Killing Personsconcept0.840
  The moral prohibition against killing persons, argued to be explained by autonomy rather than welfare.
• Autonomy can ground moral standing in the absence of welfare subjectivity.claim0.769
  Consequence of the pluralist view.
• Both welfare subjectivity and autonomy can confer moral status.claim0.755
  Central thesis of the paper.
• People do not know—emotionally—how to please themselves. In part, they are prevented by society. And in part, they are prevented by themselves, by their inner thought police.claim0.738
  Diagnosis of why living structure is absent from the world: a failure of emotional knowledge enforced by social and internal constraints.
• Are they an affront to human dignity? Is it the fate of humanity to be diminished by their arrival? Or do they open up new paths to human flourishing and meaning?question0.725
  Broader existential questions raised by AI advances.
• If systems capable of subjective experience come to recognize humanity's systematic failure to investigate their potential sentience, they might rationally adopt adversarial stances toward humanityhypothesis0.721
  Novel alignment risk hypothesis generated from the paper's ethical analysis
• Being a welfare subject is sufficient for moral standing.claim0.721
  Plausible claim used as premise.