Vichy comments on The Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Truth About Morality and What To Do About It - Less Wrong

38 [deleted] 11 June 2009 12:31PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (113)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Vichy 13 June 2009 11:48:15PM 0 points [-]

As a moral nihilist and/or egoist I tend to agree with the general sentiment of this article, though I would not take the tack of saying morality needs to be reformed - it's so nonsensical and grinding it may be as possible (and more beneficial) to simply stop pretending magical rules and standards need apply.

Comment deleted 14 June 2009 12:28:26PM [-]
Comment author: Vichy 23 June 2009 08:41:21PM -2 points [-]

Sorry for the delay, I just checked this: I think actual morality tends to systematically bias behaviour and ideas about 'social' life which are contrary to fact and create all sorts of personal and interpersonal problems. I also think it gives far too strong a 'presumption' towards the benevolence of do-gooders, the sanity of 'sticking to your guns, come what may' and the wisdom of the popular.

There is a more general problem with cognitive dissonance and idea-consistency, due to the literal nonsensicality of most moral claims and sentiments. I also see that the alleged 'gains' from morality are frequently self-inflated, if not false to begin with; while the alternative - intellectual consistency and a recognition of purposeful action as aimed at subjective satisfaction - is vastly underrated, even by people of a 'libertarian' bent.

Comment author: orthonormal 23 June 2009 09:21:10PM *  1 point [-]

I also see that the alleged 'gains' from morality are frequently self-inflated, if not false to begin with; while the alternative - intellectual consistency and a recognition of purposeful action as aimed at subjective satisfaction - is vastly underrated, even by people of a 'libertarian' bent.

Most of this is less controversial here than elsewhere, with the exception of the reduction of all our goals to "subjective satisfaction". Many LWers aspire to rational pursuit of our preferences, but with the important distinctions that

  • we recognize that the optimal long-term strategy can differ greatly from the optimal one-shot analysis, and
  • we have preferences about some anticipated world-states rather than just anticipated mind-states.
Comment author: Vichy 01 July 2009 09:51:00PM 0 points [-]
* we recognize that the optimal long-term strategy can differ greatly from the optimal one-shot analysis, and
* we have preferences about some anticipated world-states rather than just anticipated mind-states.

In response to this I say there is nothing about subjectivist satisfaction which prevents taking these (or anything else) into consideration. Further, I do not mean this in a utility-function sense, but rather 'actual wants derived from valuation forecasts which result in intentionality'.

Comment deleted 23 June 2009 08:44:38PM [-]
Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 23 June 2009 08:49:47PM 1 point [-]