Jack comments on No Universally Compelling Arguments in Math or Science - Less Wrong

30 Post author: ChrisHallquist 05 November 2013 03:32AM

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

Comments (227)

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

Comment author: Jack 06 November 2013 09:15:38PM 6 points [-]

You would have one opinion, someone else has another. But Charlie can't be in a a quantum superposition of jailed and free.

If whether Charlie is punished or not is entirely up to me then if I think he deserves to be punished I will do so; if I don't I will not do so. If I have to persuade someone else to punish him, then I will try. If the legal system is doing the punishing then I will advocate for laws that agree with my morals. And so on.

if there is no objective fact of the matter about moral claim, there is none about who gets punished or rewarded

No. There is no objective fact about who ought to get punished or rewarded. Obviously people do get punished and rewarded: and this happens according to the moral values of the people around them and the society they live in. In lots of societies there is near-universal acceptance of many moral judgments and these get codified into norms and laws and so on.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 07 November 2013 09:16:20AM *  -1 points [-]

If whether Charlie is punished or not is entirely up to me then if I think he deserves to be punished I will do so; if I don't I will not do so. If I have to persuade someone else to punish him, then I will try. If the legal system is doing the punishing then I will advocate for laws that agree with my morals. And so on.

And do you alone get a say (after all, you belive that what you think is right, is right) or does anybody else?

There is no objective fact about who ought to get punished or rewarded.

Exactly. My view "works" int that it can rationally justify punishment and reward.