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.

BerryPick6 comments on A confusion about deontology and consequentialism - Less Wrong Discussion

5 [deleted] 11 February 2013 07:19PM

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

Comments (85)

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

Comment author: BerryPick6 12 February 2013 06:47:17PM *  -1 points [-]

...So, what "am" I? What labels do I "get", having hereby cited, to the best of my understanding, the primary points and positions of all the sides of the debates here, with in my mind no contradiction whatsoever in any of the above?

If I've understood your position correctly, it's extremely similar to what I would call the "high-level LW metaethical consensus." Luke's sequence on Pluralistic Moral Reductionism, Eliezer's more recent posts about metaethics and a few posts by Jack all illustrate comparable theories to yours. If others have written extensively about metaethics on LW, I may have missed them.

Comment author: whowhowho 13 February 2013 09:05:08PM 0 points [-]

These seem different from each other to me.

Comment author: BerryPick6 14 February 2013 08:11:19AM 0 points [-]

How so?

Comment author: whowhowho 14 February 2013 09:44:39AM 0 points [-]

I don't see (explicit) pluralism in EY. Jack's approach is so deflationary it could be an error theory.