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.

army1987 comments on Morality should be Moral - Less Wrong Discussion

9 Post author: OrphanWilde 17 May 2013 03:26PM

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

Comments (63)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 18 May 2013 06:05:17PM 2 points [-]

OTOH, we're not logically omniscient, so certain statements are useful to hear even if they are correct in all universes (e.g. “3107418240490043721350750035888567930037346022842727545720161948823206440518081504556346829671723286782437916272838033415471073108501919548529007337724822783525742386454014691736602477652346609 equals 1634733645809253848443133883865090859841783670033092312181110852389333100104508151212118167511579 times 1900871281664822113126851573935413975471896789968515493666638539088027103802104498957191261465571”).

Comment author: someonewrongonthenet 18 May 2013 08:42:43PM *  0 points [-]

You are right - I deliberately avoided the use of the term "useful statements" for this reason.

1) There are tautological statements

2) There are [insert word here] statements.

3) There are useful statements (these can be tautological, [insert word here], or false).

But we don't have a word for [insert word here]...well, prior to taking logic 101, laymen usually insert "true" into the slot, but for some reason we've decided to define the term "true" such that it refers to both tautologies and [insert word here], while neglecting to create a term exclusively for [insert word here].

That's my objection. Approaching [insert word here] is the goal of the sciences...we practically worship [insert word here], in a way that we do not worship tautologies. We aught to have a word that refers to it exclusively. I'd prefer that word to be "Truth", but then the mathematicians went and permanently broadened the meaning of that word, and now we can't have nice things anymore, so we need some other word.

Comment author: [deleted] 19 May 2013 11:54:18AM 0 points [-]

“Empirically true statements”?

Comment author: [deleted] 18 May 2013 09:40:43PM 0 points [-]

[insert word here]

Informative?

Comment author: someonewrongonthenet 18 May 2013 10:27:43PM *  0 points [-]

See above discussion.

It's means: a statement which is true in our universe, but is not a tautology.

I guess we need a one syllable word for "statement which increases one's knowledge about the universe within which one exists". Thus "statements which are [insert word here] restrict the set of universes one is in" would be a tautology.

Comment author: [deleted] 18 May 2013 10:30:06PM 0 points [-]

Right, I was suggesting the word 'informative'.

Comment author: someonewrongonthenet 18 May 2013 10:35:24PM *  0 points [-]

Oh, sorry.

Yeah, there are a few candidates - "informative", "real", etc.

The trouble is that we are smashing through the layman's definition again. If we define "informative" as [insert word here], then we must also say that a calculus textbook is not at all informative.