= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
timtyler comments on A (small) critique of total utilitarianism - 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 (237)
So: I am talking about science, while you are talking about moral philosophy. Now that we have got that out the way, there should be no misunderstanding - though in the rest of your post you seem keen to manufacture one.
I was talking about both. My basic point was that the reason humans evolved to care about morality and moral philosophy in the first place was because doing so made them very trustworthy, which enhanced their IGF by making it easier to obtain allies.
My original reply was a request for you to clarify whether you meant that utilitarians are cynically pretending to care about utilitarianism in order to signal niceness, or whether you meant that humans evolved to care about niceness directly and care about utilitarianism because it is exceptionally nice (a "niceness superstimulus" in your words). I wasn't sure which you meant. It's important to make this clear when discussing signalling because otherwise you risk accusing people of being cynical manipulators when you don't really mean to.