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.

Perplexed comments on Social ethics vs decision theory - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: AlexMennen 20 February 2011 04:14AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (33)

Comments (33)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Perplexed 20 February 2011 05:07:35AM 1 point [-]

When an average person says "ethics", ey is usually referring to a system of intuitions and social pressures designed to influence the behavior of members of a group. ... Why don't we talk about the social meaning of ethics?

I get the impression that to a utilitarian, ethics doesn't have a "social meaning" in the sense that it deals with the way society pressures us to behave in a certain way. A utilitarian cares about other people, but ey doesn't pay too much attention to what society wants - given a choice between doing what society wants and doing the right thing, a utilitarian moral realist will try to do the right thing.

... a failure to properly distinguish between decision theory and what society pressures people to do. Most lesswrong users probably understand the distinction fairly clearly ...

They do indeed, but many of them probably deny that "what society pressures people to do" is the same thing as "what is right". And the utilitarians are able to embed their morality in their utility function, and so they use the same decision theory for what is 'right' and for what is 'advantageous'.

Comment author: AlexMennen 20 February 2011 05:21:55AM 0 points [-]

Have you ever met a utilitarian?

Comment author: Dorikka 20 February 2011 05:37:31AM *  1 point [-]

I think of values/morality/desires/preferences/etc. in the form of a large utility function. I can't work with numbers, of course, but it helps me sort things out in my head.

Comment author: Perplexed 20 February 2011 05:29:40AM 0 points [-]

Have you ever met a utilitarian?

Not outside of a philosophy text or a blog posting, no, I haven't. But I'm pretty sure they do exist.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 20 February 2011 05:38:13PM -1 points [-]

I exist. I am conscious of my own identity. I was born and I shall die. I have arms and legs. I occupy a particular point in space. No other solid object can occupy the same point simultaneously.

Is it in that sense, that you are pretty sure that utilitarians exist?

Comment author: Perplexed 20 February 2011 06:03:45PM *  1 point [-]

I'm pretty sure that there are people who sincerely claim to be utilitarians in the sense that they try to use that ethical doctrine to guide their actions. Is this really controversial? To anyone besides tim_tyler, that is?

ETA: I recognize that I am confused. Can anyone point out what I am missing here?

Comment author: RichardKennaway 21 February 2011 12:28:39AM *  0 points [-]

I thought you might be suggesting that no-one is actually a utilitarian, although they might believe they are.

Comment author: Perplexed 21 February 2011 01:50:40AM 1 point [-]

When I said I had never met a utilitarian, I meant, literally, that I have never even met someone who claimed to be a utilitarian. When I said that I am sure that there are sincere utilitarians who try their best to use the doctrine to guide their actions, I meant exactly that.

As far as I am concerned, someone who tries to be a utilitarian really is a utilitarian.

Comment author: wedrifid 20 February 2011 05:54:02PM 0 points [-]

No other solid object can occupy the same point simultaneously.

(With overwhelmingly high probability.)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit