derefr comments on On Being Okay with the Truth - Less Wrong

33 Post author: lukeprog 02 May 2011 12:17AM

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

Comments (71)

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

Comment author: derefr 02 May 2011 04:32:26AM *  2 points [-]

In the sociological "let's all decide what norms to enforce" sense, sure, a lack of "morality" won't kill anyone. But in the more speculative-fictional "let's all decide how to self-modify our utility functions" sense, throwing away our actual morality—the set of things we do or do not cringe about doing—in ourselves, or in our descendants, is a very real possibility, and (to some people) a horrible idea to be fought with all one's might.

What I find unexpected about this is that libertarians (the free-will kind) tend to think in the second sense by default, because they assume that their free will gives them absolute control over their utility function, so if they manage to argue away their morality, then, by gum, they'll stop cringing! It seems you first have to guide people into realizing that they can't just consciously change what they instinctively cringe about, before they'll accept any argument about what they should be consciously scorning.

Comment author: pjeby 02 May 2011 04:05:53PM 5 points [-]

It seems you first have to guide people into realizing that they can't just consciously change what they instinctively cringe about, before they'll accept any argument about what they should be consciously scorning.

But you can consciously change what you "instinctively" cringe about. Otherwise, people couldn't, say, get over their fear of public speaking.

Sure, there might be some things you can't change, but one's moral views aren't really one of them. (Consider, e.g. all the cultures where killing someone for besmirching your honor is considered a moral good.)