jmed 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: [deleted] 18 May 2011 01:10:27AM 2 points [-]

So, "You can do what you should do" is equivalent to"You should do what you should do".

If these are equivalent, then the truth of the second statement should entail the truth of the first. But "You should do what you should do" is ostensibly a tautology, while "You can do what you should do" is not, and could be false.

One out you might want to take is to declare "S should X" only meaningful when ability and circumstance allow S to do X; when "S can X." But then you just have two clear tautologies, and declaring them equivalent is not suggestive of much at all.

Comment author: lessdazed 18 May 2011 01:49:06AM 0 points [-]

Decisive points.

As you have shown them to not be equivalent, I would have done better to say:

"You can do what you should do" entails "You should do what you should do".

But if the latter statement is truly a tautology, that obviously doesn't help. If I then add your second edit, that by "should" I mean "provided one is able to", I am at least less wrong...but can my argument avoid being wrong only by being vacuous?

I think so.