komponisto comments on Strong moral realism, meta-ethics and pseudo-questions. - Less Wrong

18 [deleted] 31 January 2010 08:20PM

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

Comments (172)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: komponisto 29 May 2014 07:24:30PM 1 point [-]

Why can't morality be about satisfying your values?

Because that isn't how the term "morality" is typically used by humans. The "morality police" found in certain Islamic countries aren't life coaches. The Ten Commandments aren't conditional statements. When people complain about the decaying moral fabric of society, they're not talking about a decline in introspective ability.

Inherent to the concept of morality is the external imposition of values. (Not just decisions, because they also want you to obey the rules when they're not looking, you see?) Sociologically speaking, morality is a system for getting people to do unfun things by threatening ostracization.

Decision theory (and meta-decision-theory etc.) does not exist to analyze this concept (which is not designed for agents); it exists to replace it.

Comment author: bogus 31 May 2014 02:59:32PM *  0 points [-]

Because that isn't how the term "morality" is typically used by humans. The "morality police" found in certain Islamic countries aren't life coaches. The Ten Commandments aren't conditional statements. ... Inherent to the concept of morality is the external imposition of values.

Morality is about all of these things. and more besides. Although "outer" morality as embodied in moral codes and moral exemplars is definitely important, if there were no inner values for humans to care about in the first place, no one would be going around and imposing them on others, or even debating them in any way.

And it is a fact about the world that most basic moral values are shared among human societies. Morality may or may not be objective, but it is definitely intersubjective in a way that looks 'objective' to the casual observer.

Comment author: blacktrance 29 May 2014 08:39:47PM *  0 points [-]

"Morality" is used by humans in unclear ways and I don't know how much can be gained from looking at common usage. It's more sensible to look at philosophical ethical theories rather than folk morality - and there you'll find that moral internalism and ethical egoism are within the realm of possible moralities.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 29 May 2014 08:34:18PM *  0 points [-]

Morality done right is about the voluntary and mutual adjustment of values ( or rather actions expressing them).

Morally done wrong can go two ways, one failure mode is hedonism, where the individual takes no notice of the preferences of others:; the other is authoritarianism, where "society" (rather, its representatives) imposes values that no-one likes or has a say in.