what is the rock-solid argument we can give our kids for why they should be kind, and why have philosophers failed to find it for thousands of years?

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

• 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.claim0.760
  Diagnosis of why living structure is absent from the world: a failure of emotional knowledge enforced by social and internal constraints.
• For the first time in modern history, ways of thinking are available that make the criteria for 'living' potentially sharable and actually shared.claim0.749
  Asserts that the theoretical foundation laid out in the four books provides a public quality standard for sequences.
• There are no controlled studies and no consensus on optimal policies for raising children, making alignment debates simultaneously vital and empirically intractablequestion0.737
  Research gap identified as structurally parallel to AI alignment problem
• "We should avoid quotes around mental terms because there is no absolute, binary distinction between it knows and it knows—only a difference in the degree to which a model will be useful."concept0.734
  Core assertion against categorical distinction between genuine and metaphorical cognition; justifies continuous gradualist approach.
• Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.quote0.734
  Einstein's assertion invoked to explain why BMR preserves accuracy while reducing complexity
• Twentieth‑century thinking has made us careless so that we do not recognize this deeper structure as more profound and do not know how to create it.claim0.733
  Blames modern education and design culture for losing the ability to generate living environments.
• 'What do they look like?' and 'Where did they come from?' are even worse guides to moral relationships with forthcoming beings than they have always been between humans.claim0.730
  Argues that physical appearance and origin (evolved vs. engineered) are inadequate bases for moral concern
• We must develop principled approaches to evaluating the sentience of (and thus, our responsibility to) beings of unfamiliar provenance and composition.claim0.730
  Call to action for new frameworks.