rabidchicken comments on Separate morality from free will - Less Wrong

6 Post author: PhilGoetz 10 April 2011 02:35AM

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

Comments (84)

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

Comment author: DanielLC 10 April 2011 08:01:18PM 0 points [-]

I believe the "free will" thing is because without it, you could talk about whether or not a rock is moral. You could just say whether or not the universe is moral.

I consider morality to be an aspect of the universe (a universe with happier people is better, even if nobody's responsible), so I don't see any importance of free will.

Comment author: rabidchicken 10 April 2011 11:36:52PM 2 points [-]

I don't understand, you cannot talk about whether a rock is moral?

Given that a rock appears to have no way to recieve input from the universe, create a plan to satisfy its goals, and act, I would consider a rock morally neutral - In the same way that I consider someone to be morally neutral when they fail to prevent a car from being stolen while they are in a coma in another country.