= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DanArmak comments on Two questions about CEV that worry me - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (137)
Please clarify: do you think there's some objective external standard or goal, according to which we've been progressing in some areas and regressing in others?
If you're aware of what that goal is, why haven't you adopted it as your personal morals, achieving 100% progression?
If you're not aware of what it is, why do you think it exists and what do you know about it?
To me the word "morality" means the philosophy underlying the social contract. The goal is human well-being. When I say we've regressed in some areas, I mean that we've modified the social contract in ways that are harmful to human well-being.
To make the terms concrete, consider the case of communism. Clearly this was a drastic revision of the social contract with disastrous consequences for human well-being. The revision was justified by a certain set of moral values that turned out to be far inferior to the more traditional ones.
What is an objective measure of human well-being? Whatever the answer, it will contradict some people's morals; so you're condemning these morals as wrong. To me that seems to be favoring your own morals.
Don't get me wrong - our moral are probably quite compatible. It's just that I think "I prefer my own morals" is both simpler and more honest than "I prefer an objective measure, which just happens to agree with my morals, and which many other people don't accept".