TheAncientGeek comments on Open thread, October 2011 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: MarkusRamikin 02 October 2011 09:05AM

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

Comments (308)

Sort By: Controversial

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

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 13 October 2016 01:32:08PM *  1 point [-]

I see morality as fundamentally a way of dealing with conflicts between values/goals, so I cant answer questions posed in terms of "our values", because I don't know whether that means a set of identical values, a set of non-identical but non conflicting values, or a set of conflicting values. One of the implications of that view is that some values/goals are automatically morally irrelevant , since they can be satisfied without potential conflict. Another implication is that my view approximates to "morality is society's rules", but without the dismissive implication..if a society as gone through a process of formulating rules that are effective at reducing conflict, then there is a non-vacuous sense in which that society's morality is its rules. Also AI and alien morality are perfectly feasible, and possibly even necessary.

Comment author: hairyfigment 13 October 2016 08:02:28PM 0 points [-]

Were the Babyeaters immoral before meeting humans?

If not, what would you like to call the thing we actually care about?

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 13 October 2016 09:03:47PM 1 point [-]

If I don't use "moral" as a rubber stamp for all and any human value, you don't run into CCCs problem of labeling theft and murder as moral because some people value them. That's the upside. Whats the downside?