= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
chaosmosis comments on Rationality Quotes September 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 (1088)
My first reaction is to want to say that economic progress is an increase in purchasing power. However, purchasing power is measured with reference to the utility of goods. That would be fine as a solution, except that those definitions would mean that it would be literally impossible for an increase in economic progress to be bad on utilitarian grounds. That's not what "economic progress" is generally taken to mean, so I won't use that definition.
Instead, I'll say that economic progress is an increase in the ability to produce goods, whether those goods are good or bad. This increase can be either numerical or qualitative, I don't care. Now, it might not be possible to quantify this precisely, but that's not necessary to determine that economic progress occurs. Clearly, we are now farther economically progressed than we were in the Dark Ages.
Moral progress would be measured depending on the moral theory you're utilizing. I would use a broad sort of egoism, personally, but most people here would use utilitarianism.
With an egoist framework, you could keep track of how happy or sad you were directly. You could also measure the prevalence of factors that tend to make you happy and then subtract the prevalence of factors that tend to make you sad (while weighting for relative amounts of happiness and sadness, of course), in order to get a more objective account of your own happiness.
With a utilitarian framework, you would measure the prevalence of things that tend to make all people happy, and then subtract the prevalence of things that tend to make all people sad. If there was an increase in the number of happy people, then that would mean moral progress in the eyes of a utilitarian.
You make no argument. You merely ask a question. If you have a general counterargument or want to refute the specifics of any of my points, feel free. So far, you haven't done anything like that. Also, although it might not be possible to quantify economic or moral progress precisely, we can probably do it well enough for most practical purposes. I don't understand the purpose of the points you're trying to raise here.