= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
pedanterrific comments on How to understand people better - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (164)
What does it say about me that my first instinctive response was "I'm a consequentialist, not a virtue ethicist."
It's not good enough to just be a consequentialist rather than a virtue ethicist. You have to be a conequentialist for the right reasons or it doesn't count.
Intentions are physical facts about brains. If you care about those particular physical facts, then you can be a consequentialist who cares about intentions.
Often, some of the physical facts that determine whether a certain word applies to a certain situation happen to be physical facts that fall under the heading of "intentions".
It's just... if "intention always matters" when choosing which word to use to describe someone else's actions, you spend an inordinate amount of time not knowing how to describe something while you gather data on the other agent's intentions, data which may not ever be definitive. That seems to rather miss the point of language.