Garren 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.

Article Navigation

Comments (71)
Tags: metaethics morality

Comments (71)

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

Comment author: BenAlbahari 02 May 2011 05:05:55AM 3 points [-]

I've gone through massive reversals in my metaethics twice now, and guess what? At no time did I spontaneously acquire the urge to rape people. At no time did I stop caring about the impoverished. At no time did I want to steal from the elderly. At no time did people stop having reasons to praise or condemn certain desires and actions of mine, and at no time did I stop having reasons to praise or condemn the desires and actions of others.

Metaethics: what's it good for...

Comment author: Garren 02 May 2011 03:17:12PM 2 points [-]

Well, metaethics isn't supposed to be good for telling us which things are wrong and which things are right. Nor is it supposed to be about providing us with motivation to do good.

The chief role of metaethics is to answer questions about what it means for things to be morally right or wrong or what we're doing when we make moral judgments. In some ways, this is a relatively meek endeavor, which is why it's not completely outrageous for someone to claim it's 'solvable' now.

Comment author: BenAlbahari 02 May 2011 03:39:26PM -1 points [-]

The chief role of metaethics is to provide far-mode superstimulus for those inclined to rationalize social signals literally.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit