You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

orthonormal comments on Another Argument Against Eliezer's Meta-Ethics - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: Wei_Dai 05 February 2011 12:54AM

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

Comments (35)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: orthonormal 06 February 2011 12:35:16AM 1 point [-]

The vicious circle isn't really there, any more than (in the terminology of Good and Real) a properly constructed street-crossing robot would use the knowledge of its safe disposition to conclude that it must be safe to cross. See also You Provably Can't Trust Yourself.

Comment author: Wei_Dai 06 February 2011 02:07:54AM *  1 point [-]

"Properly constructed" is the key phrase here. The vicious circle shouldn't be there, and wouldn't be if "right" is defined correctly (for example perhaps as a logical construct which itself doesn't refer to "right"), but if by "right" IE means IE's output, then it is there.

Comment author: orthonormal 06 February 2011 05:13:05PM 0 points [-]

By "right", BE and IE both mean "the output of algorithm X". The fact that IE happens to be algorithm X doesn't cause a vicious circle.