Lumifer comments on Rationality Quotes Thread September 2015 - Less Wrong

3 Post author: elharo 02 September 2015 09:25AM

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

Comments (482)

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

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 01 October 2015 08:27:37AM *  2 points [-]

I don't see how you can be sure about, when there is so much disagreement about the meaning of good. Human preferences are complex because they are idiosyncratic, but why would a deity, particularly a "philosopher's god", have idiosyncratic preferences? And an omniscient deity could easily be a 100% accurate consequentialist..the difficult part of consequentialism, having reliable knowledge of the consequences, has been granted...all you need to add to omniscience is a Good Will.

IOW, regarding both atheism and consequentialism as slam-dunks is a bit of a problem, because if you follow through the consequences of consequentialism, many of the arguments atheism unravel: a consequentialist deity is fully entitled to destroy two cities to save 10, that would be his version of a trolley problem.

Comment author: Lumifer 01 October 2015 02:23:16PM 1 point [-]

a consequentialist deity is fully entitled to destroy two cities to save 10

Not if the deity is omnipotent.

Comment author: TheAncientGeek 02 October 2015 12:04:02PM 1 point [-]

That's debatable, at which point it is no longer a slam dunk.