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.

TimS comments on How to deal with non-realism? - Less Wrong Discussion

12 Post author: loup-vaillant 22 May 2012 01:58PM

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

Comments (168)

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

Comment author: TimS 30 May 2012 01:57:08AM 0 points [-]

In the case of Mussolini, it turns out that the value system he adopted "valued" being imposed on others. But the quote you found suggests that he might have known this in advance - before he knew anything concrete about the value system he would adopt. That's not something that moral anti-realism says you can know in advance.

More realistically, it's likely that Mussolini choose his value system with knowledge of the contents, and specifically picked one that called for it to be imposed on others. But using this quality of the moral system as a litmus test for whether to pick it is not justified by moral anti-realism. Mussolini asserts the contrary, which is why I question whether he is using the label "moral relativist" appropriately.

Comment author: torekp 30 May 2012 09:58:25PM 0 points [-]

I don't quite think he asserts that. He merely claims that fascism is at least equal to anything else in measure of consistency with relativism. But I'm not too interested in the finer points of Mussolini interpretation. I'm mainly putting him forth in answer to your interest in non-moral-realist tyrants.

Comment author: TimS 30 May 2012 11:21:41PM 0 points [-]

Fair enough, but whether Mussolini is accurate to label himself a moral relativist is fairly central to whether he disproves my "tyranny = moral realism" assertion.

Comment author: torekp 31 May 2012 12:55:39AM 2 points [-]

Even if he did make the mistake of thinking relativism implies imposition, that need not invalidate his claim to be a moral relativist. Relativism remains consistent with imposition. And his comment that "all ideologies are mere fictions" certainly seems to point him in a broadly anti-realist direction.

Comment author: TimS 31 May 2012 01:39:27AM 1 point [-]

Well put. Hmm . . . must think more about what's wrong with my previous thesis.