simon2 comments on Consolidated Nature of Morality Thread - Less Wrong

13 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 15 April 2007 11:00PM

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

Comments (68)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: simon2 16 April 2007 11:33:10AM 0 points [-]

Of course few to no people will read this but...

1. yes, they are different 2-4 empirical questions 5. no 6. n/a 7. no sense 8. 2+2=4 is true given the commonly accepted definitions of the terms involved. Given an assumed systemization of morality moral statements could be "true" relative to that systematization in the same sense that 2+2=4 is true relative to commonly accepted arithmetic. However, I don't consider this a particularly useful way of thinking about morality. 9. any ought-statement can be converted (in principle) into a "pure" ought-statement by rephrasing it as an implication of the original statement from a sufficiently detailed set of factual assumptions. 10.same as 9