nyan_sandwich comments on Policy Debates Should Not Appear One-Sided - Less Wrong

102 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 03 March 2007 06:53PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (179)
Tags: morality politics psychology

Comments (179)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 18 January 2013 08:47:59PM 0 points [-]

Because then you apportion reward and punishment where they are deserved. That is itself a Good, called "justice"

I get it now. I think I ought to hold myself to a higher standard than I hold other people, because it would be ridiculous to judge everyone in the world for failing to try as hard as they can to improve it, and ridiculous to let myself off with anything less than that full effort. And I take it you don't see things this way.

I don't see how that follows from consequentialism or anything else.

It follows from the practical concern that A only gets to control the actions of A, so any question not in some way useful for determining A's actions isn't interesting to A.

Comment author: Peterdjones 18 January 2013 09:01:01PM -1 points [-]

. I think I ought to hold myself to a higher standard than I hold other people, because it would be ridiculous to judge everyone in the world for failing to try as hard as they can to improve it, and ridiculous to let myself off with anything less than that full effort.

It doesn't follow from that that you have no interest in praise and blame.

It follows from the practical concern that A only gets to control the actions of A, so any question not in some way useful for determining A's actions isn't interesting to A.

Isn't A interested in the actions of B and C that impinge on A?

Comment author: [deleted] 18 January 2013 09:06:03PM *  1 point [-]

It doesn't follow from that that you have no interest in praise and blame.

Yes, and it doesn't follow that because I am interested in praise and blame, I must hold other people to the same standard I hold myself. I said right there in the passage you quoted that I do in fact hold other people to some standard, it's just not the same as I use for myself.

Isn't A interested in the actions of B and C that impinge on A?

Yes as a matter of epistemology and normative ethics, but not as a matter of metaethics.

Comment author: Peterdjones 18 January 2013 09:18:35PM -1 points [-]

Yes as a matter of epistemology and normative ethics, but not as a matter of metaethics.

Your metaethics treats everyone as acting but not acted on?

Comment author: DaFranker 18 January 2013 09:08:38PM *  2 points [-]

Isn't A interested in the actions of B and C that impinge on A?

A is interested in:

1) The state of the world. This is important information for deciding anything.
2) A's possible actions, and their consequences. "Their consequences" == expected future state of the world for each action.

"actions of B and C that impinge on A" is a subset of 1) and "giving praise and blame" is a subset of 2). "Influencing the actions of B and C" is also a subset of 2).

Comment author: Peterdjones 18 January 2013 09:15:48PM 0 points [-]

A is interested in:

1) The state of the world. This is important information for deciding anything. 2) A's possible actions, and their consequences. "Their consequences" == expected future state of the world for each action.

Or, briefly "The Union of A and not-A"

or, more briefly still:

"Everything".

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit