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.

Eugine_Nier comments on Why didn't people (apparently?) understand the metaethics sequence? - Less Wrong Discussion

12 Post author: ChrisHallquist 29 October 2013 11:04PM

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

Comments (229)

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

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 31 October 2013 03:12:48AM 3 points [-]

When you say "agents" here, did you mean to say "psychologically normal humans"? Because the general claim I think Eliezer would reject, based on what he says on No Universally Compelling Arguments.

Well, "No Universally Compelling Arguments" also applies to physics, but it is generally believed that all sufficiently intelligent agents would agree on the laws of physics.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 November 2013 01:04:38PM 0 points [-]

True, but physics is discoverable via the scientific method, and ultimately, in the nastiest possible limit, via war. If we disagree on physics, all we have to do is highlight the disagreement and go to war over it: whichever one of us is closer to right will succeed in killing the other guy (and potentially a hell of a lot of other stuff).

Whereas if you try going to war over morality, everyone winds up dead and you've learned nothing, except possibly that almost everyone considers a Hobbesian war-of-all-against-all to be undesirable when it happens to him.