lukeprog comments on Conceptual Analysis and Moral Theory - Less Wrong

60 Post author: lukeprog 16 May 2011 06:28AM

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

Comments (456)

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

Comment author: lukeprog 17 May 2011 01:20:11PM *  2 points [-]

We are trying to be 'less wrong' because human brains are so far from ideal at epistemology and at instrumental rationality ('agency'). But it's a standard LW perspective to assert that there is a territory, and some maps of (parts of) it are right and others are wrong. And since we are humans, it helps to retrain our emotions: "Relinquish the emotion which rests upon a mistaken belief, and seek to feel fully that emotion which fits the facts."

Comment author: Amanojack 18 May 2011 06:56:53AM 3 points [-]

And since we are humans, it helps to retrain our emotions: "Relinquish the emotion which rests upon a mistaken belief, and seek to feel fully that emotion which fits the facts."

I'd rather call this "self-help" than "meta-ethics." Why self-help? Because...

But it's a standard LW perspective to assert that there is a territory, and some maps of (parts of) it are right and others are wrong.

...even if my emotions are "wrong," why should I care? In this case, the answer can only be that it will help me derive more satisfaction out of life if I get it "right", which seems to fall squarely under the purview of self-help.

Of course we can draw the lines between meta-ethics and self-help in various ways, but there is so much baggage in the label "ethics" that I'd prefer to get away from it as soon as possible.