= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TheOtherDave comments on Welcome to Less Wrong! (2012) - 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 (1430)
I was with you, until your summary.
Suppose hypothetically that I think "don't kill people" is a good broad moral rule, and I think babies are people.
It seems to follow from what you said that I therefore ought to agree that infanticide should be legal.
If that is what you meant to say, then I am deeply confused. If (hypothetically) I think babies are people, and if (hypothetically) I think "don't kill people" is a good law, then all else being equal I should think "don't kill babies" is a good law. That is, I should believe that infanticide ought not be any more legal than murder in general.
It seems like one of us dropped a negative sign somewhere along the line. Perhaps it was me, but if so, I seem incapable of finding it again.
Quite right, I had an extra negative in there - the people I need to talk to aren't those who think babies are not people, because we already agree. Fixed, thanks.
Oh good! I don't usually nitpick about such things, but you had me genuinely puzzled.