The problem is, EY may just be contradicting himself, or he may be being ambiguous, and even deliberately so.

"what is right is a huge computational property—an abstract computation—not tied to the state of anyone's brain, including your own brain."

I think his views could be clarified in a moment if he stated clearly whether this abstract computation is identical for everyone. Is it AC219387209 for all of us, or AC42398732 for you, and AC23479843 for me, with the proviso that it *might* be the case that AC42398732 = AC_23479843?

Your quote makes it appear the former.Other quotes in this thread about a "shared W" point to that as well.

Then again, quotes in the same article make it appear the latter, as in:

If you hoped that morality would be universalizable—sorry, that one I really can't give back. Well, unless we're just talking about humans. Between neurologically intact humans, there is indeed much cause to hope for overlap and coherence;

We're all busy playing EY Exegesis. Doesn't that strike anyone else as peculiar? He's not dead. He's on the list. And he knows enough about communication and conceptualization to have been clear in the first place. And yet on such a basic point, what he writes seems to go round and round and we're not clear what the answer is. And this, after years of opportunity for clarification.

It brings to mind Quirrell:

“But if your question is why I told them that, Mr. Potter, the answer is that you will find ambiguity a great ally on your road to power. Give a sign of Slytherin on one day, and contradict it with a sign of Gryffindor the next; and the Slytherins will be enabled to believe what they wish, while the Gryffindors argue themselves into supporting you as well. So long as there is uncertainty, people can believe whatever seems to be to their own advantage. And so long as you appear strong, so long as you appear to be winning, their instincts will tell them that their advantage lies with you. Walk always in the shadow, and light and darkness both will follow.”

If you're trying to convince people of your morality, and they have already picked teams, there is an advantage in letting it appear to each that they haven't really changed sides.