Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on If reductionism is the hammer, what nails are out there? - Less Wrong

14 Post author: AnnaSalamon 11 December 2010 01:58PM

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

Comments (46)

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

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 11 December 2010 02:10:01PM 12 points [-]

I know moral relativism is not universally popular, but can reductionism/rationalism lead to anything else?

That depends a lot on what you mean by "moral relativism". Certainly rationality and reductionism need not imply taking morality less seriously. I liked what Eliezer's Harry Potter had to say on the subject:

"No," Professor Quirrell said. His fingers rubbed the bridge of his nose. "I don't think that's quite what I was trying to say. Mr. Potter, in the end people all do what they want to do. Sometimes people give names like 'right' to things they want to do, but how could we possibly act on anything but our own desires?"

"Well, obviously," Harry said. "I couldn't act on moral considerations if they lacked the power to move me. But that doesn't mean my wanting to hurt those Slytherins has the power to move me more than moral considerations!"

If you haven't looked at it already, you might like Eliezer's sequence on metaethics, which talks about how one can notice that our concerns are generated by our brains, and that one could design brains with different concerns, while still taking morality seriously.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 11 December 2010 08:34:36PM 10 points [-]

I'm glad someone noticed that. It was NOT EASY to compress that entire metaethical debate down into two paragraphs of text that wouldn't distract from the main story.