= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
nshepperd comments on The deeper solution to the mystery of moralism—Believing in morality and free will are hazardous to your mental health - 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
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (20)
Having read the article, I can now confirm that it is approximately as worthless as its poor formatting and excessive wordiness would suggest. Downvoted.
However irritating the formatting might be (and believe me, it did irritate me), I think you still have an intellectual obligation to provide some kind of justification for making such a harsh judgment on someone else's contribution. What made the article worthless, in your estimation? (You don't need to write a detailed review; a few lines should suffice.)
The article (as well as being poorly formatted and wordy):
Appears to equate moral realism with some kind of deontology, or virtue theory, it's hard to tell, since the term is only defined through describing what bad things it causes.
Seems to have been written in ignorance of the notion of compatibilist free will, as well as lacking justification for why free will would even be relevant anyway.
In general seems to be a long string of arguments with little justification of their validity, and
Mainly, appears to have been written for the purpose of proving wrong the author's political opponent "moralism", and as such to have written the bottom line first.
I could be more specific, but I don't really think it would be worthwhile.
I agree with these points, and I also think that he is using certain terms in either unique or unfamiliar ways. This, in itself, is fine, but I'm not seeing any specific place in which these words are defined as being used in an unusual manner, and it left me very confused as I was reading.
Many thanks.
I disagree. There's too many idiots out there for me to provide an explanation to everyone I dismiss.
That's fine - if you're strapped for time, you can "dismiss" them without posting anything. But if you have the time to complain, then you should make the complaints helpful.
Careful with that axe, Eugene.
Unjustified assertions could be more productive if not made. Creating fuss about idiots makes unnecessary noise. However, we could think this dismissiveness inform us about the status of the post.