= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Normal_Anomaly comments on Morality as Fixed Computation - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (45)
Let me see if I get this by repeating it in my own words: The answer to the question, "what do I want?" is: "Whatever will save the most people/create the most happiness/etc." The answer to the question "what is right?" is: Whatever action will save the most people/create the most happiness/etc. Possibly donating to charity.
As I understand it, it's not that the latter is the answer to that question, it's that they're the same question.
It's not that it just happens to be Right to do what a certain Huge Blob of Computation tells you to do; the idea is that moral words like "right" and "should" are pointers to that Huge Blob and nothing else. Beyond that, there's no separable essence of morality such that it's anything other than a tautology to say "What is right? Whatever action will save the most lives, create the most fun, ..." The feeling of separable epiphenomenal essences is a common (not just about morality) fallacy that's discussed in several posts in the Words sequence, IIRC.
That's a good way to explain it. Thank you.