TheOtherDave comments on Science: Do It Yourself - Less Wrong

53 Post author: alyssavance 13 February 2011 04:47AM

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

Comments (205)

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

Comment author: randallsquared 17 February 2011 01:02:50AM 3 points [-]

It only implies "objectively wrong" if you believe in objective morality. But even if you do, the term "evil" also implies that your top goals and theirs conflict, so it works even then. The alternative, it seems, is to have "evil" be a term we can't use under any circumstances, which just means some other word or phrase will come to mean what "evil" meant before we stopped using it, and it looks like you're using "alien" for that purpose in the other branch of this thread.

The 19 hijackers (or Hitler, as originally mentioned) were not (necessarily) irrational, stupid, insane, or otherwise mentally damaged. Nor were their motivations completely opaque or untranslatable, as "alien" implies -- any human could understand their position given the effort to do so, unpleasant though it might be. Their goals were just incompatible with our goals, and only one set of goals could win. It seems to me that evil is exactly what that means.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 17 February 2011 04:17:34PM 1 point [-]

I wouldn't have a problem with describing a system whose motivations I understand, but which lead it to make decisions I can't imagine myself ever making or endorsing, as "alien."

But I agree that this has nothing to do with whether our goal-systems motivate mutually exclusive states of the world. (For which I usually use the word "opponent.")