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.

Darklight comments on Beware the Nihilistic Failure Mode - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: Gram_Stone 09 July 2015 03:31PM

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

Comments (24)

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

Comment author: UtilonMaximizer 09 July 2015 05:26:30PM 4 points [-]

Here, it goes without saying that each of these positions is wrong.

I am under the impression that many in this community are consequentialist and that all consequentialists are moral nihilists by default in that they don't believe in the existence of inherent moral truths (moral truths that don't necessarily affect utility functions).

Comment author: Darklight 09 July 2015 11:52:51PM 3 points [-]

Uh, I was under the impression that most consequentialists are moral universalists. They don't believe that morality can be simplified into absolute statements like "lying is always wrong", but do still believe in conditional moral universals such as "in this specific circumstance, lying is wrong for all subjects in the same circumstance".

This is fundamentally different from moral relativism that argues that morality depends on the subject, or moral nihilism that says that there are no moral truths at all. Moral universalism still believes there are moral truths, but that they depend on the conditions of reality (in this case, that the consequences are good).

Even then, most Utilitarian consequentialists believe in one absolute inherent moral truth, which is that "happiness is intrinsically good", or that "the utility function, should be maximized."

Admittedly some consequentialists try to deny that they believe this and argue against moral realism, but that's mostly a matter of metaethical details.