Allan_Crossman comments on The Meaning of Right - Less Wrong

30 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 29 July 2008 01:28AM

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

Comments (147)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Allan_Crossman 29 July 2008 06:47:00PM 1 point [-]

Eliezer [in response to me]: This just amounts to defining should as an abstract computation, and then excluding all minds that calculate a different rule-of-action as "choosing based on something other than morality". In what sense is the morality objective, besides the several senses I've already defined, if it doesn't persuade a paperclip maximizer?

I think my position is this:

If there really was such a thing as an objective morality, it would be the case that only a subset of possible minds could actually discover or be persuaded of that fact.

Presumably, for any objective fact, there are possible minds who could never be convinced of that fact.