= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
homunq comments on 2011 Less Wrong Census / Survey - 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 (694)
Probabilities? Makes no sense. But yes, a scaled response for each would be nice, since I'd say I'm about 40% consequentialist, 10% deontologist, 1% virtue, and 49% irrational about morality.
I reread the question. It wasn't asking what I thought it was.
Here is what I thought it said: Which of these do you think is true? What it really said was: Which of these do you identify with? (I must have pattern matched on the question when I saw the form of the answers.)
So your reply makes sense. Still, I would rather the question had been worded differently. Which of these do you use in practice when making moral choices? Which of these do you think best explains morality?
To me, "identify" is an evil word. Because you could let something into your identity you didn't want.
No, I meant probabilities. As in, "I assign a 40 percent chance of consequentialism being true."
What does it mean for a morality to be "true"?
It depends what you mean by "morality". If you think morality refers to "a series of conventions that tend to promote survival," you can be wrong about that.